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 |
A comparison of types and thicknesses of adhesive felt padding in the reduction of peak plantar pressure of the foot: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Case Reports, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13256-015-0675-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael J. Curran, Connor Ratcliffe, Jackie Campbell |
| Abstract |
This case report will have implications for any area of medicine that aims to redistribute plantar pressure away from a particular area of the foot. This could be for example in the short-term care of people with diabetes, people who have insensate feet and people with poor blood supply to the foot coupled with plantar ulceration. The aim of the study was to investigate which type and thickness of Hapla felt padding is the most effective at redistributing plantar pressure of the foot. This case report is the first of its kind. The participant was a healthy 50-year-old white man with a high peak plantar pressure over the second metatarsal head of both feet; he required removal of a plantar callus on a periodic basis. The reader should note that different types of Hapla felt padding provide different forms of redistribution of plantar pressure on the foot. In the clinic it may be useful to measure peak plantar pressure using F-Scan before deciding on the most appropriate type of felt padding. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 25 | 32% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 21 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 30% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 17% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 4% |
| Design | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 22 | 29% |
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 02 October 2016.
All research outputs
#13,382,435
of 22,849,304 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#909
of 3,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,578
of 274,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#15
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,849,304 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,922 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. 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 274,702 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.