↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of interventions in reducing pain and maintaining physical activity in children and adolescents with calcaneal apophysitis (Sever’s disease): a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, May 2013
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 (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Effectiveness of interventions in reducing pain and maintaining physical activity in children and adolescents with calcaneal apophysitis (Sever’s disease): a systematic review
Published in
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1757-1146-6-16
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alicia M James, Cylie M Williams, Terry P Haines

Abstract

Calcaneal apophysitis, also commonly known as sever's disease, is a condition seen in children usually aged between 8-15 years. Conservative therapies, such as taping, heel lifts and orthotic intervention are accepted management practices for calcaneal apophysitis, though there is very little high quality research examining the efficacy of such treatment modalities. Previous narrative literature reviews and opinion pieces provide some evidence for the use of heel raises or orthoses. The aim of this manuscript was to complete a systemic review on the treatment options for calcaneal apophysitis as measured by pain reduction and maintenance of physical activity.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 123 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 28 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 15%
Student > Master 19 15%
Researcher 15 12%
Student > Postgraduate 13 10%
Other 33 26%
Unknown 1 <1%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 61 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 20%
Sports and Recreations 14 11%
Unspecified 12 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 1 <1%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 17 January 2019.
All research outputs
#2,345,812
of 13,232,126 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#221
of 534 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,774
of 149,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#2
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,232,126 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 534 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 149,455 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.