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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Predictive ability of the start back tool: an ancillary analysis of a low back pain trial from Danish general practice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12891-017-1727-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Allan Riis, Michael Skovdal Rathleff, Cathrine Elgaard Jensen, Martin Bach Jensen |
| Abstract |
Low back pain (LBP) is a common cause of contact with the primary healthcare sector. In some patients, symptoms quickly resolve, but others develop long-lasting pain and disability. To improve the care pathway for patients with LBP, the STarT Back Tool (STarT) questionnaire has been developed. It helps initial decision-making by subgrouping patients on the basis of their prognosis and helps to target treatment according to prognosis. An assumption behind the use of STarT is the ability to predict functional improvement. This assumption has never been tested in a population that consists exclusively of patients enrolled when consulting a Danish general practitioner for LBP. The aim of this study was to investigate STarT's ability to predict a 30% improvement in the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score. This was an ancillary analysis using data from a Danish guideline implementation study (registered at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01699256). An inclusion criterion was age 18 to 65 years of age. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, fractures, and signs of underlying pathology. Patient-reported STarT score and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire were administered at baseline and again after 4, 8, and 52 weeks. Between January 2013 and July 2014, 475 patients from the original trial participated with questionnaires. From this subpopulation, 441 (92.8%) patients provided information regarding STarT. Baseline and eight-week RMDQ data were available for 304 (64.0%) patients. After 8 weeks, 61 (65.6%) in the low-risk group, 67 (54.9%) in the medium-risk group, and 33 (37.1%) in the high-risk group had achieved a 30% improvement in the RMDQ score. After 8 weeks, high-risk patients were at 61% (95% CI: 20-125%, P < 0.001) higher risk of not achieving a 30% improvement in the RMDQ score compared with patients in either the low-risk group or the medium-risk group. STarT was predictive for functional improvement in patients from general practice with LBP. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01699256 , Nov 29, 2016 (registered retrospectively). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 76 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 22% |
| Researcher | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 19 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 25% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 5% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 23 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,299,546
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,140
of 4,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,035
of 317,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#45
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,091 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 317,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.