↓ Skip to main content

Motor control strategies during double leg squat following anterior cruciate ligament rupture and reconstruction: an observational study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, February 2014
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 (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
177 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
Motor control strategies during double leg squat following anterior cruciate ligament rupture and reconstruction: an observational study
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1743-0003-11-19
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paulien E Roos, Kate Button, Robert W M van Deursen

Abstract

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injured individuals often show asymmetries between the injured and non-injured leg. A better understanding of the underlying motor control could help to improve rehabilitation. Double leg squat exercises allow for compensation strategies. This study therefore investigated motor control strategies during a double leg squat with the aim to investigate if individuals with ACL rupture (ACLD), ACL reconstruction (ACLR) and healthy control subjects (CONT) used different strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Canada 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 172 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 18%
Student > Bachelor 19 11%
Researcher 12 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 35 20%
Unknown 35 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 38 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 38 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 16%
Engineering 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 12 7%
Unknown 47 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 06 January 2021.
All research outputs
#4,705,554
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#261
of 1,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,857
of 235,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#7
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 235,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.