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 |
Efficacy of the addition of interferential current to Pilates method in patients with low back pain: a protocol of a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2474-15-420 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yuri Rafael dos Santos Franco, Richard Eloin Liebano, Katherinne Ferro Moura, Naiane Teixeira Bastos de Oliveira, Gisela Cristiane Miyamoto, Matheus Oliveira Santos, Cristina Maria Nunes Cabral |
| Abstract |
Chronic low back pain is one of the four most common diseases in the world with great socioeconomic impact. Supervised exercise therapy is one of the treatments suggested for this condition; however, the recommendation on the best type of exercise is still unclear. The Pilates method of exercise is effective in reducing pain and disability in these patients, as well as the analgesia promoted by interferential current. Currently, the literature lacks information on the efficacy of the association of these two techniques in the short- and medium-term than performing one of the techniques isolated. The objective of this study will be to evaluate the efficacy of adding interferential current to the Pilates method exercises for the treatment of patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain in the short- and medium-term. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 17% |
| Australia | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 341 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 339 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 59 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 54 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 27 | 8% |
| Researcher | 19 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 5% |
| Other | 54 | 16% |
| Unknown | 110 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 83 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 62 | 18% |
| Sports and Recreations | 34 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 26 | 8% |
| Unknown | 123 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 19 August 2015.
All research outputs
#2,368,510
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#486
of 4,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,534
of 361,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#8
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,039 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 361,216 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.