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 |
Study protocol for patient response to spinal manipulation – a prospective observational clinical trial on physiological and patient-centered outcomes in patients with chronic low back pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6882-14-292 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ting Xia, David G Wilder, Maruti R Gudavalli, James W DeVocht, Robert D Vining, Katherine A Pohlman, Gregory N Kawchuk, Cynthia R Long, Christine M Goertz |
| Abstract |
Low back pain (LBP) is a major health issue due to its high prevalence rate and socioeconomic cost. While spinal manipulation (SM) is recommended for LBP treatment by recently published clinical guidelines, the underlying therapeutic mechanisms remain unclear. Spinal stiffness is routinely examined and used in clinical decisions for SM delivery. It has also been explored as a predictor for clinical improvement. Flexion-relaxation phenomenon has been demonstrated to distinguish between LBP and healthy populations. The primary objective of the current study is to collect preliminary estimates of variability and effect size for the associations of these two physiological measures with patient-centered outcomes in chronic LBP patients. Additionally biomechanical characteristics of SM delivery are collected with the intention to explore the potential dose-response relationship between SM and LBP improvement. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 161 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 155 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 28 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 13% |
| Researcher | 18 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 18 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 10% |
| Other | 33 | 20% |
| Unknown | 27 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 54 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 32 | 20% |
| Engineering | 10 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 8 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 9% |
| Unknown | 38 | 24% |
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 01 September 2014.
All research outputs
#3,962,933
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#748
of 3,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,644
of 230,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#20
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,621 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 230,503 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.