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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Incorporating assessment of the cervical facet joints in the modified Stoke ankylosing spondylitis spine score is of additional value in the evaluation of spinal radiographic outcome in ankylosing spondylitis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Arthritis Research & Therapy, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13075-017-1285-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fiona Maas, Suzanne Arends, Elisabeth Brouwer, Hendrika Bootsma, Reinhard Bos, Freke R. Wink, Anneke Spoorenberg |
| Abstract |
To aim was to investigate the additional value of incorporating the de Vlam cervical facet joint score in the modified ankylosing spondylitis (AS) spine score (mSASSS) for the evaluation of spinal radiographic outcome in AS. Baseline and 4-year radiographs from 98 consecutive patients from the Groningen Leeuwarden AS (GLAS) cohort, who had AS treated with TNF-α inhibitors, were scored by two readers; the vertebral bodies were assessed according to the mSASSS (0-72) and cervical facet joints (C2-C7) were assessed according to the method of de Vlam (0-15). The combined AS spine score (CASSS) was calculated as the sum of both total scores (range 0-87) and compared with the original mSASSS according to three aspects of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) filter: feasibility, discrimination, and truth. Feasibility: the CASSS was calculated in 91% of the patients. No additional radiographs were necessary and the assessment took only a few extra minutes. Discrimination: both scoring methods had excellent inter-observer reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) status scores >0.99, progression scores 0.92). Incorporating the cervical facet joints did not result in an increase in measurement error. The CASSS detected more patients with definite damage (61% vs. 57%) and definite progression (55% vs. 48%). Truth: higher CASSS scores at baseline and higher progression scores were seen in 41 (46%) and 22 (25%) patients, respectively. Cervical rotation correlated better with cervical CASSS than with cervical mSASSS (Spearman's rho = 0.68 vs. 0.59). The CASSS is a relevant and easy modification of the mSASSS. It captures more patients with AS who have spinal radiographic damage and progression, which is of great additional value in the evaluation of radiographic outcome in this heterogeneous and overall slowly progressing disease. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 19% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 52% |
| Psychology | 2 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 April 2017.
All research outputs
#8,537,346
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#1,710
of 3,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,133
of 323,575 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#25
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,380 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 323,575 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.