↓ Skip to main content

Can we predict the outcome for people with patellofemoral pain? A systematic review on prognostic factors and treatment effect modifiers

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Sports Medicine, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
64 X users
facebook
9 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
204 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
Can we predict the outcome for people with patellofemoral pain? A systematic review on prognostic factors and treatment effect modifiers
Published in
British Journal of Sports Medicine, December 2016
DOI 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096545
Pubmed ID
Authors

M Matthews, M S Rathleff, A Claus, T McPoil, R Nee, K Crossley, B Vicenzino

Abstract

Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is a multifactorial and often persistent knee condition. One strategy to enhance patient outcomes is using clinically assessable patient characteristics to predict the outcome and match a specific treatment to an individual. A systematic review was conducted to determine which baseline patient characteristics were (1) associated with patient outcome (prognosis); or (2) modified patient outcome from a specific treatment (treatment effect modifiers). 6 electronic databases were searched (July 2016) for studies evaluating the association between those with PFP, their characteristics and outcome. All studies were appraised using the Epidemiological Appraisal Instrument. Studies that aimed to identify treatment effect modifiers underwent a checklist for methodological quality. The 24 included studies evaluated 180 participant characteristics. 12 studies investigated prognosis, and 12 studies investigated potential treatment effect modifiers. Important methodological limitations were identified. Some prognostic studies used a retrospective design. Studies aiming to identify treatment effect modifiers often analysed too many variables for the limiting sample size and typically failed to use a control or comparator treatment group. 16 factors were reported to be associated with a poor outcome, with longer duration of symptoms the most reported (>4 months). Preliminary evidence suggests increased midfoot mobility may predict those who have a successful outcome to foot orthoses. Current evidence can identify those with increased risk of a poor outcome, but methodological limitations make it difficult to predict the outcome after one specific treatment compared with another. Adequately designed randomised trials are needed to identify treatment effect modifiers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 64 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 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 203 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 18%
Student > Bachelor 27 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 8%
Other 14 7%
Researcher 9 4%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 70 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 52 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 41 20%
Sports and Recreations 16 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Engineering 3 1%
Other 10 5%
Unknown 77 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. 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 08 October 2022.
All research outputs
#834,481
of 24,585,148 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Sports Medicine
#1,564
of 6,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,775
of 430,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Sports Medicine
#48
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,585,148 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,388 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 66.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 430,357 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.