↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of three treatment strategies on occupational limitations and quality of life for patients with non-specific chronic low back pain: Is a multidisciplinary approach the key feature to…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
201 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
Effectiveness of three treatment strategies on occupational limitations and quality of life for patients with non-specific chronic low back pain: Is a multidisciplinary approach the key feature to success: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-15-131
Pubmed ID
Authors

Audrey Petit, Ghislaine Roche-Leboucher, Luc Bontoux, Valérie Dubus, Yohann Ronzi, Yves Roquelaure, Isabelle Richard

Abstract

Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is a significant public health problem, being the primary cause of work absenteeism, as well as affecting sufferers' quality of life, in industrialized society. International guidelines recommend intensive multidisciplinary approaches for patients with cLBP. However, these costly and time-consuming programs can only be offered to a minority of the most heavily affected patients and therefore do not seem likely to respond to public health requirements. Lighter programs may be an alternative to full time hospital-based programs with valuable results in terms of disability and occupational activity for cLBP patients. It is therefore important to define both what the determining components of management to improve activity restriction are and how to treat a larger number of patients more effectively at a lower cost. The aim of this study is to compare three programs with various levels of intensity and multidisciplinary.

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 201 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 201 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 18%
Student > Bachelor 30 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 10%
Researcher 13 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 5%
Other 33 16%
Unknown 59 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 39 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 15%
Sports and Recreations 9 4%
Psychology 8 4%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Other 35 17%
Unknown 72 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 27 January 2015.
All research outputs
#6,837,254
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,342
of 4,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,566
of 203,744 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#35
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,035 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 203,744 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 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 71% of its contemporaries.