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 |
Work related etiology of de Quervain’s tenosynovitis: a case-control study with prospectively collected data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12891-015-0579-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stéphane Stahl, Daniel Vida, Christoph Meisner, Adelana Santos Stahl, Hans-Eberhard Schaller, Manuel Held |
| Abstract |
The etiology of de Quervain's tenosynovitis (dQ) has been based on conflicting small case series and cohort studies lacking methodological rigor. A prospective case-control study was conducted to analyze the most common risk factors for dQ. Between January 2003 and May 2011, 189 patients surgically treated for dQ vs. 198 patients with wrist ganglia (WG) (controls) were identified in our clinic's electronic database. Sample characteristics, exertional, anatomical, and medical risk factors were compared between groups. dQ vs. WG differed by average age (52 vs. 43 years) and gender ratio (15/62 vs. 26/39). No significant difference between dQ vs. WG was found after subgrouping professional activities (manual labor: 18 % vs. 26 %, respectively, p = 0.23). No asymmetric distribution of comorbidities, wrist trauma, forceful or repetitive manual work, or medication was observed. Neither heavy manual labor nor trauma could be shown to be predisposing risk factors for dQ. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 138 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 4% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 19 | 14% |
| Unknown | 47 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 37% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 12% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 2% |
| Engineering | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 9 | 7% |
| Unknown | 53 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 12 October 2020.
All research outputs
#5,052,743
of 24,733,536 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,004
of 4,321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,620
of 271,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#18
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,733,536 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,321 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 271,552 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.