↓ Skip to main content

Staying physically active after spinal cord injury: a qualitative exploration of barriers and facilitators to exercise participation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2009
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
188 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
353 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
Staying physically active after spinal cord injury: a qualitative exploration of barriers and facilitators to exercise participation
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2009
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-9-168
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew Kehn, Thilo Kroll

Abstract

While enhancing physical activity has been an essential goal of public health officials, people with physical impairments such as spinal cord injury (SCI) are more likely to live a sedentary lifestyle. Exercise has been shown to decrease the risk for many of the secondary conditions associated with SCI, including osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease, pressure ulcers, urinary tract infections, diabetes and arthritis, yet this population is rarely a target for health promotion efforts. This paper examines the self-reported exercise experiences of people with SCI using a qualitative-exploratory design.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 353 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
Canada 3 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 343 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 65 18%
Student > Bachelor 56 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 11%
Researcher 33 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 5%
Other 59 17%
Unknown 82 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 73 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 48 14%
Sports and Recreations 46 13%
Psychology 16 5%
Social Sciences 14 4%
Other 59 17%
Unknown 97 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 26 August 2014.
All research outputs
#1,892,374
of 23,743,910 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,110
of 15,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,402
of 116,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#7
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,743,910 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,426 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 116,361 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.