↓ Skip to main content

Standing up in multiple sclerosis (SUMS): protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial evaluating the clinical and cost effectiveness of a home-based self-management standing frame…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, May 2016
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 (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
310 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
Standing up in multiple sclerosis (SUMS): protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial evaluating the clinical and cost effectiveness of a home-based self-management standing frame programme in people with progressive multiple sclerosis
Published in
BMC Neurology, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12883-016-0581-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. A. Freeman, W. Hendrie, S. Creanor, L. Jarrett, A. Barton, C. Green, J. Marsden, E. Rogers, J. Zajicek

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an incurable, unpredictable but typically progressive neurological condition. It is the most common cause of neurological disability in young adults. Within 15 years of diagnosis, approximately 50 % of affected people are unable to walk unaided, and over time an estimated 25 % depend on a wheelchair. Typically, people with such limited mobility are excluded from clinical trials. Severely impaired people with MS spend much of their day sitting, often with limited ability to change position. In response, secondary complications can occur including: muscle wasting, pain, reduced skin integrity, spasms, limb stiffness, constipation, and associated psychosocial problems such as depression and lowered self-esteem. Effective self-management strategies, which can be implemented relatively easily and cheaply within people's homes, are needed to improve or maintain mobility and reduce sedentary behaviour. However this is challenging, particularly in the latter stages of disease. Regular supported standing using standing frames is one potential option. SUMS is a pragmatic multi-centre randomised controlled trial evaluating use of Oswestry standing frames with blinded outcome assessment and full economic evaluation. Participants will be randomly allocated (1:1) to either a home-based, self-management standing programme (with advice and support) along with their usual care or to usual care alone. Those in the intervention group will be asked to stand for a minimum of 30 min three times weekly over 20 weeks. Each participant will be followed-up at 20 and 36 weeks post baseline. The primary clinical outcome is motor function, assessed using the Amended Motor Club Assessment. The primary economic endpoint is quality-adjusted life years. The secondary outcomes include measures of explanatory physical impairments, key clinical outcomes, and health-related quality of life. An embedded qualitative component will explore participant's and carer's experiences of the standing programme. This is the first large scale multi-centre trial to assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of a home based standing frame programme for people who are severely impaired by MS. If demonstrated to be effective and cost-effective, we will use this evidence to develop recommendations for a health service delivery model which could be implemented across the United Kingdom. ISRCTN69614598 DATE OF REGISTRATION: 3.2.16 (retrospectively registered).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 310 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Unknown 307 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 54 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 12%
Student > Bachelor 29 9%
Researcher 25 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 5%
Other 52 17%
Unknown 98 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 46 15%
Psychology 36 12%
Sports and Recreations 15 5%
Social Sciences 12 4%
Other 44 14%
Unknown 109 35%
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 06 November 2018.
All research outputs
#3,669,247
of 23,316,003 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#444
of 2,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,380
of 300,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#11
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,316,003 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 2,487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. 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 300,092 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.