↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of a theory-based multicomponent intervention (Movement Coaching) on the promotion of total and domain-specific physical activity: a randomised controlled trial in low back pain patients

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
176 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 a theory-based multicomponent intervention (Movement Coaching) on the promotion of total and domain-specific physical activity: a randomised controlled trial in low back pain patients
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12891-017-1788-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Schaller, Katja Petrowski, Timo-Kolja Pfoertner, Ingo Froboese

Abstract

The promotion of physical activity is a major field in rehabilitation and health promotion but evidence is lacking on what method or strategy works best. Ensuing from this research gap, the present study compared the effectiveness of a comprehensive theory based multicomponent intervention (Movement Coaching) to a low intensity intervention in low back pain patients. A monocenter randomized controlled trial with three measuring points (T0 = baseline, T1 = six month follow-up, T2 = twelve month follow-up) was conducted. N = 412 chronic low back pain patients participated. The Movement Coaching group (n = 201) received a comprehensive multicomponent intervention with small-group intervention, phone- and web 2.0-intervention. The low intensity control (n = 211) received two oral presentations that were available for download afterwards. Main outcome was total physical activity measured by Global Physical Activity Questionnaire at 12 month follow-up. Additionally, workplace, leisure time and transportation activities were compared. A split-plot anova was conducted for evaluating repeated measure effects and between group effects. At six and twelve month follow-up there were no statistically significant between group differences in total (T1: p = 0.79; T2: p = 0.30) as well as domain-specific physical activity (workplace (T1: p = 0.16; T2: p = 0.65), leisure time (T1: p = 0.54; T2: p = 0.89), transportation (T1: p = 0.29; T2: p = 0.77) between Movement Coaching and the control group. In both groups, workplace physical activity showed the highest proportion of total physical activity. From baseline to twelve month follow-up the results showed a decline in total physical activity (Movement Coaching: p = 0.04; control group: p = 0.50). The comprehensive Movement Coaching intervention was not found to be more effective than a low intensity intervention in promoting total and domain-specific physical activity in chronic low back pain patients. This study is registered at German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS)-ID: DRKS00004878 .

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 176 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 176 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 16%
Student > Bachelor 25 14%
Other 12 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 6%
Researcher 9 5%
Other 26 15%
Unknown 65 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 35 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 13%
Sports and Recreations 17 10%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Psychology 5 3%
Other 21 12%
Unknown 70 40%
Attention Score in Context

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 14 November 2017.
All research outputs
#14,084,031
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,063
of 4,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,019
of 330,777 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#43
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 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 330,777 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 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.