↓ Skip to main content

A multimedia campaign to improve back beliefs in patients with non-specific low back pain: a process evaluation

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
172 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
A multimedia campaign to improve back beliefs in patients with non-specific low back pain: a process evaluation
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12891-017-1551-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arnela Suman, Frederieke G. Schaafsma, Jiman Bamarni, Maurits W. van Tulder, Johannes R. Anema

Abstract

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most prevalent and costly disorders worldwide. To reduce its burden in the Netherlands, implementation of a multidisciplinary guideline for LBP was supported by a multifaceted eHealth campaign for patients with LBP. The current study aims 1) to evaluate whether the implementation strategy was performed as planned; 2) to assess the feasibility, barriers and facilitators of the patient based eHealth campaign; 3) to gain insight into the satisfaction and experiences of patients with various ethnic backgrounds with the implementation strategy and to make a comparison between them; and 4) to explore the association between exposure to and satisfaction with the implementation strategy. This process evaluation was performed using the Linnan and Steckler framework, and used a mixed methods approach for data collection and analysis. The relationship between satisfaction of patients and exposure to the strategy was statistically examined. Semi-structured interviews were analysed using qualitative data analysis methods. Two hundred and fourteen patients participated in the quantitative, and 44 in the qualitative analysis. Most were female and had a high level of education. Many patients did not use the campaign at all or only once, and those that did rated it as reasonable. Patient satisfaction with the campaign increased significantly with an increase in its use. Qualitative analysis showed that four main themes played a role in campaign rating and use: satisfaction with intervention components, perceived benefits of the intervention, usage of the intervention, and satisfaction with the medium used. This process evaluation showed that the eHealth campaign was used only by a small proportion of patients with non-specific LBP. It seemed that the campaign was offered to the patients too late, that the lay-out of the campaign did not meet patient needs, and that healthcare providers rarely discussed the campaign with their patients, while involvement of those providers seemed to improve trustworthiness of the campaign and increase its usage. It is important to invest effort into healthcare providers to motivate patients to use eHealth intervention and to tailor strategies better to the needs of users. Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NTR4329 . Registered December 20th, 2013.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 171 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 12%
Student > Bachelor 19 11%
Researcher 18 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 6%
Other 9 5%
Other 32 19%
Unknown 62 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 30 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 15%
Sports and Recreations 7 4%
Psychology 6 3%
Neuroscience 4 2%
Other 24 14%
Unknown 75 44%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 March 2018.
All research outputs
#13,039,497
of 22,973,051 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,767
of 4,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,188
of 313,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#41
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,973,051 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,088 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 313,770 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.