↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a health coaching intervention to improve the lifestyle of patients with knee osteoarthritis: cluster randomized clinical trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
277 Mendeley
Title
Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a health coaching intervention to improve the lifestyle of patients with knee osteoarthritis: cluster randomized clinical trial
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12891-015-0501-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Victoria Carmona-Terés, Iris Lumillo-Gutiérrez, Lina Jodar-Fernández, Teresa Rodriguez-Blanco, Joanna Moix-Queraltó, Enriqueta Pujol-Ribera, Xavier Mas, Enrique Batlle-Gualda, Milena Gobbo-Montoya, Anna Berenguera

Abstract

The prevalence of osteoarthritis and knee osteoarthritis in the Spanish population is estimated at 17% and 10.2%, respectively. The clinical guidelines concur that the first line treatment for knee osteoarthritis should be non-pharmacological and include weight loss, physical activity and self-management of pain. Health Coaching has been defined as an intervention that facilitates the achievement of health improvement goals, the reduction of unhealthy lifestyles, the improvement of self-management for chronic conditions and quality of life enhancement. The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a health coaching intervention on quality of life, pain, overweight and physical activity in patients from 18 primary care centres of Barcelona with knee osteoarthritis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 277 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 275 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 46 17%
Student > Master 43 16%
Researcher 24 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 6%
Other 52 19%
Unknown 74 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 62 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 50 18%
Sports and Recreations 14 5%
Psychology 12 4%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Other 49 18%
Unknown 83 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 December 2015.
All research outputs
#14,806,069
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,299
of 4,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,783
of 255,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#32
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,042 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 255,481 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.