↓ Skip to main content

Individualized chiropractic and integrative care for low back pain: the design of a randomized clinical trial using a mixed-methods approach

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, March 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
204 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
Individualized chiropractic and integrative care for low back pain: the design of a randomized clinical trial using a mixed-methods approach
Published in
Trials, March 2010
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-11-24
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristine K Westrom, Michele J Maiers, Roni L Evans, Gert Bronfort

Abstract

Low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent and costly condition in the United States. Evidence suggests there is no one treatment which is best for all patients, but instead several viable treatment options. Additionally, multidisciplinary management of LBP may be more effective than monodisciplinary care. An integrative model that includes both complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and conventional therapies, while also incorporating patient choice, has yet to be tested for chronic LBP.The primary aim of this study is to determine the relative clinical effectiveness of 1) monodisciplinary chiropractic care and 2) multidisciplinary integrative care in 200 adults with non-acute LBP, in both the short-term (after 12 weeks) and long-term (after 52 weeks). The primary outcome measure is patient-rated back pain. Secondary aims compare the treatment approaches in terms of frequency of symptoms, low back disability, fear avoidance, self-efficacy, general health status, improvement, satisfaction, work loss, medication use, lumbar dynamic motion, and torso muscle endurance. Patients' and providers' perceptions of treatment will be described using qualitative methods, and cost-effectiveness and cost utility will be assessed.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 198 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 33 16%
Student > Master 29 14%
Researcher 25 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 12%
Other 13 6%
Other 37 18%
Unknown 42 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 68 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 17%
Psychology 12 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 3%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Other 30 15%
Unknown 45 22%
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 06 August 2014.
All research outputs
#17,154,245
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#23
of 45 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,757
of 104,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 45 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one scored the same or higher as 22 of them.
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 104,225 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.