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 |
Study protocol: The back pain outcomes using longitudinal data (BOLD) registry
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2474-13-64 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jeffrey G Jarvik, Bryan A Comstock, Brian W Bresnahan, Srdjan S Nedeljkovic, David R Nerenz, Zoya Bauer, Andrew L Avins, Kathryn James, Judith A Turner, Patrick Heagerty, Larry Kessler, Janna L Friedly, Sean D Sullivan, Richard A Deyo |
| Abstract |
Back pain is one of the most important causes of functional limitation, disability, and utilization of health care resources for adults of all ages, but especially among older adults. Despite the high prevalence of back pain in this population, important questions remain unanswered regarding the comparative effectiveness of commonly used diagnostic tests and treatments in the elderly. The overall goal of the Back pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD) project is to establish a rich, sustainable registry to describe the natural history and evaluate prospectively the effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of interventions for patients 65 and older with back pain. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 108 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 27 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 19 | 17% |
| Unknown | 26 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 10% |
| Psychology | 9 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 20 | 18% |
| Unknown | 33 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 May 2012.
All research outputs
#15,751,194
of 23,394,907 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,525
of 4,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,083
of 164,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#31
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,394,907 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,130 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 164,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.