↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

Protocol for Shoulder function training reducing musculoskeletal pain in shoulder and neck: a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 Mendeley

What is this page?

Summary Twitter Dimensions citations
Title
Protocol for Shoulder function training reducing musculoskeletal pain in shoulder and neck: a randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-12-14
Pubmed ID
21235752
Authors

Christoffer H Andersen, Lars L Andersen, Ole S Mortensen, Mette K Zebis, Gisela Sjøgaard

Abstract

Neck and shoulder complaints are common among employees in sedentary occupations characterized by intensive computer use. Such musculoskeletal pain - which is often associated with restricted range of motion and loss of muscle strength - is one of the most common conditions treated by physical therapists. The exact mechanism of neck pain is rarely revealed by clinical examination and the treatment has varied from passive rest to active treatments. Active treatments have often been divided into either training of the painful area or the surrounding musculature avoiding direct training of the painful area. Our study investigates the effect of the latter approach.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 3%
Canada 2 1%
Denmark 2 1%
Colombia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 145 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 26%
Student > Bachelor 20 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 13%
Researcher 16 10%
Other 8 5%
Other 32 21%
Unknown 19 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 20%
Sports and Recreations 14 9%
Social Sciences 10 6%
Unspecified 3 2%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 23 15%

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 07 June 2013.
All research outputs
#7,762,737
of 12,373,620 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,522
of 2,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,087
of 146,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#10
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,620 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,454 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 146,604 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.

This page is provided by Altmetric.