↓ Skip to main content

Comparative effectiveness of ultrasound and paraffin therapy in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome: a randomized trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, November 2014
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
1 tweeter
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 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
Comparative effectiveness of ultrasound and paraffin therapy in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome: a randomized trial
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-15-399
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yi-Wei Chang, Shih-Fu Hsieh, Yu-Shiow Horng, Hui-Ling Chen, Kun-Chang Lee, Yi-Shiung Horng

Abstract

Conclusive evidence indicating an effective treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), a common entrapment neuropathy, is lacking. Ultrasound therapy (US therapy) has long been used as one of the combination treatments for CTS. In addition, paraffin bath therapy has been applied widely as a physical modality in treating patients with hand conditions. The purpose of this randomized trial was to compare the efficacy of combining a wrist orthosis with either US therapy or paraffin bath therapy in treating CTS patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 162 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 44 27%
Student > Master 20 12%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 5%
Other 31 19%
Unknown 40 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 48 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Neuroscience 2 1%
Other 11 7%
Unknown 45 27%

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 15 January 2015.
All research outputs
#9,443,898
of 15,430,898 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,717
of 3,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,744
of 306,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#211
of 412 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,430,898 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,002 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 306,125 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 412 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.