↓ Skip to main content

Metabolic cost and mechanics of walking in women with fibromyalgia syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Metabolic cost and mechanics of walking in women with fibromyalgia syndrome
Published in
BMC Research Notes, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1756-0500-6-420
Pubmed ID
Authors

Renée S MacPhee, Kristen McFall, Stephen D Perry, Peter M Tiidus

Abstract

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FS) is characterized by the presence of widespread pain, fatigue, muscle weakness and reduced work capacity. Previous research has demonstrated that women with fibromyalgia have altered walking (gait) patterns, which may be a consequence of muscular pain. This altered gait is characterized by greater reliance on hip flexors rather than ankle plantar flexors and resembles gait patterns seen in normal individuals walking at higher speeds, suggesting that gait of individuals with fibromyalgia may be less efficient.This study compared rates of energy expenditure of 6 females with FS relative to 6 normal, age and weight matched controls, at various walking speeds on a motorized treadmill. Metabolic measurements including V02 (ml/kg/min), respirations, heart rate and calculated energy expenditures as well as the Borg Scale of Perceived Exertion scale ratings were determined at baseline and for 10 min while walking at each of 2, 4 and 5 km/hour on 1% grade. Kinematic recordings of limb and body movements while treadmill walking and separate measurements of ground reaction forces while walking over ground were also determined. In addition, all subjects completed the RAND 36-Item Health Survey (1.0).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 16%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Researcher 3 4%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 22 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 16%
Sports and Recreations 8 11%
Psychology 3 4%
Unspecified 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 22 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 October 2013.
All research outputs
#15,283,138
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#2,312
of 4,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,677
of 211,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#36
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,258 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 211,746 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.