↓ Skip to main content

An overview of osteoporosis and frailty in the elderly

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
145 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
286 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
An overview of osteoporosis and frailty in the elderly
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12891-017-1403-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guowei Li, Lehana Thabane, Alexandra Papaioannou, George Ioannidis, Mitchell A. H. Levine, Jonathan D. Adachi

Abstract

Osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures remain significant public health challenges worldwide. Recently the concept of frailty in relation to osteoporosis in the elderly has been increasingly accepted, with emerging studies measuring frailty as a predictor of osteoporotic fractures. In this overview, we reviewed the relationship between frailty and osteoporosis, described the approaches to measuring the grades of frailty, and presented current studies and future research directions investigating osteoporosis and frailty in the elderly. It is concluded that measuring the grades of frailty in the elderly could assist in the assessment, management and decision-making for osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures at a clinical research level and at a health care policy level.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 286 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 285 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 47 16%
Student > Master 30 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 6%
Researcher 16 6%
Other 15 5%
Other 50 17%
Unknown 111 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 70 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 4%
Engineering 11 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 3%
Other 36 13%
Unknown 119 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,352,089
of 23,896,578 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#250
of 4,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,929
of 424,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#8
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,896,578 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,211 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,469 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.