↓ Skip to main content

Clinical decision making for using electro-physical agents by physiotherapists, an Israeli survey

Overview of attention for article published in Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Clinical decision making for using electro-physical agents by physiotherapists, an Israeli survey
Published in
Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13584-015-0015-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shmuel Springer, Yocheved Laufer, Michal Elboim-Gabyzon

Abstract

Electro-physical agents (EPAs) are fundamental components in the management arsenal of physiotherapy. The objective of this study was to provide a comprehensive understanding of the factors affecting the decisions made by Physiotherapists (PTs) when choosing to apply EPAs as a treatment modality. A purpose-designed questionnaire was developed to investigate the contribution of 13 factors on the decision to use EPAs. Two hundred questionnaires were randomly distributed to PTs attending the annual conference of the Israeli Physiotherapy Society, 2014. The factors were grouped into six categories and Wilcoxon Sign Rank tests were applied to compare their impact on decision making. In total, 144 (72%) questionnaires were completed. Good internal consistency was found for the 13 component of the decisions factors (Cronbach's coefficient alpha = 0.77) with unequal distribution of answers in each question (p < 0.01). Eighty-one percent of the participants reported past experience, and 55 % mentioned research evidence as strong or very strong factors which influence their decision to use of EPAs. However, only 38% of the participants reported patients' preferences as a strong or very strong factor. Comparisons between the six categories of the decision factors determined three levels of impact (rank scores) which were significantly different from each other (p < 0.01). Availability of equipment ranked the highest. The lowest level of impact included two categories, technology related issues and patients' and physicians' preferences. The participating PTs were likely to make decisions which were strongly impacted by availability of equipment and operational factors. This research can be used to provide practicing PTs with a basis for a critical appraisal of their decision making regarding the application of EAPs. In addition, due to the strong impact of availability of equipment, health policy makers should verify that the available equipment is up to date with the best research evidence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 13%
Professor 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Lecturer 3 5%
Researcher 3 5%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 22 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Unspecified 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 30 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 09 July 2020.
All research outputs
#12,634,907
of 22,813,792 outputs
Outputs from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#180
of 578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,104
of 264,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,813,792 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 264,259 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.