↓ Skip to main content

Clinical examination of the knee: know your tools for diagnosis of knee injuries

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
269 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 examination of the knee: know your tools for diagnosis of knee injuries
Published in
BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, October 2011
DOI 10.1186/1758-2555-3-25
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roberto Rossi, Federico Dettoni, Matteo Bruzzone, Umberto Cottino, Davide G D'Elicio, Davide E Bonasia

Abstract

The clinical evaluation of the knee is a fundamental tool to correctly address diagnosis and treatment, and should never be replaced by the findings retrieved by the imaging studies carried on the patient.Every surgeon has his own series of exams with whom he is more confident and on whom he relies on for diagnosis. Usually, three sets of series are used: one for patello-femoral/extensor mechanism pathologies; one for meniscal and chondral (articular) lesions; and one for instability evaluation.This review analyses the most commonly used tests and signs for knee examination, outlining the correct way to perform the test, the correct interpretation of a positive test and the best management for evaluating an injured knee both in the acute and delayed timing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 269 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Serbia 1 <1%
Unknown 264 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 54 20%
Student > Master 43 16%
Other 25 9%
Researcher 21 8%
Student > Postgraduate 21 8%
Other 38 14%
Unknown 67 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 116 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 11%
Sports and Recreations 22 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Engineering 5 2%
Other 21 8%
Unknown 69 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 10 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,954,031
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#117
of 679 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,740
of 152,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 679 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 152,779 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them