↓ Skip to main content

Older adult’s experience of chronic low back pain and its implications on their daily life: Study protocol of a systematic review of qualitative research

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
158 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
Older adult’s experience of chronic low back pain and its implications on their daily life: Study protocol of a systematic review of qualitative research
Published in
Systematic Reviews, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13643-018-0742-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arnold Y. L. Wong, Katarina Sjögren Forss, Jenny Jakobsson, Veronika Schoeb, Christine Kumlien, Gunilla Borglin

Abstract

Of various chronic diseases, low back pain (LBP) is the most common and debilitating musculoskeletal condition among older adults aged 65 years or older. While more than 17 million older adults in the USA suffer from at least one episode of LBP annually, approximately six million of them experience chronic LBP that significantly affects their quality of life and physical function. Since many older adults with chronic LBP may also have comorbidities and are more sensitive to pain than younger counterparts, these older individuals may face unique age-related physical and psychosocial problems. While some qualitative research studies have investigated the life experiences of older adults with chronic LBP, no systematic review has integrated and synthesized the scientific knowledge regarding the influence of chronic LBP on the physical, psychological, and social aspects of lives in older adults. Without such information, it may result in unmet care needs and ineffective interventions for this vulnerable group. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review is to synthesize knowledge regarding older adults' experiences of living with chronic LBP and the implications on their daily lives. Candidate publications will be sought from databases: PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Qualitative research studies will be included if they are related to the experiences of older adults with chronic LBP. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles, abstracts, and full-text articles for eligibility. The reference lists of the included studies will be checked for additional relevant studies. Forward citation tracking will be conducted. Meta-ethnography will be chosen to synthesize the data from the included studies. Specifically, the second-order concepts that are deemed to be translatable by two independent reviewers will be included and synthesized to capture the core of the idiomatic translations (i.e., a translation focusing on salient categories of meaning rather than the literal translation of words or phrases). This systematic review of qualitative evidence will enable researchers to identify potential unmet care needs, as well as to facilitate the development of effective, appropriate, person-centered health care interventions targeting this group of individuals. PROSPERO 2018: CRD42018091292.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 158 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 14%
Student > Bachelor 20 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 9%
Researcher 11 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 4%
Other 30 19%
Unknown 54 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 32 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 18%
Psychology 7 4%
Arts and Humanities 4 3%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 64 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 04 June 2018.
All research outputs
#3,658,521
of 23,079,238 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#676
of 2,008 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,154
of 330,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#20
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,079,238 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,008 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 330,368 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.