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 |
Pressure mat analysis of naturally occurring lameness in young pigs after weaning
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Veterinary Research, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12917-014-0193-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ellen Meijer, Maarten Oosterlinck, Arie van Nes, Willem Back, Franz Josef van der Staay |
| Abstract |
Lameness is a common problem in modern swine husbandry. It causes welfare problems in affected pigs as well as financial problems for farmers. To minimize these negative consequences of lameness, new treatment and prevention strategies need to be developed and validated using objective and quantitative measurement techniques. An example of such a putative diagnostic tool is the use of a pressure mat. Pressure mats are able to provide both objective loading (kinetic) as well as objective movement (kinematic) information on pig locomotion.In this study, pressure mat analysis was used to assess compensatory force redistribution in lame pigs; in particular a predefined set of four pressure mat parameters was evaluated for its use to objectively distinguish clinically lame from sound pigs. Kinetic data from 10 clinically lame and 10 healthy weaned piglets were collected. These data were analyzed to answer three research questions. Firstly the pattern of compensatory weight distribution in lame animals was studied using the asymmetry indices (ASI) for several combinations of limbs. Secondly, the correlation between total left-right asymmetry index and visual scores of lameness was assessed. Thirdly, by using receiver-operated curve (ROC) analysis, optimal cutoff values for these ASIs were then calculated to objectively detect lame pigs. |
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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Austria | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 13 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 27% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 14 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 10% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 August 2014.
All research outputs
#18,376,056
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,915
of 3,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,939
of 235,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#39
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,042 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 235,611 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.