| Title |
No Difference in Gait Recovery After THA With Different Head Diameters: A Prospective Randomized Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11999-013-2926-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luigi Zagra, Federica Anasetti, Luca Bianchi, Vittorio Licari, Roberto Giacometti Ceroni |
| Abstract |
Larger femoral heads are commonly presumed to improve joint stability and hip biomechanics; some studies have suggested they may hasten recovery of a normal gait. To our knowledge, no gait analysis studies have compared different size head diameters in THA. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 72 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 20% |
| Unknown | 22 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 16% |
| Engineering | 6 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 26 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 August 2013.
All research outputs
#14,278,028
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#4,329
of 7,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,229
of 204,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#40
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,298 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 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 204,369 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 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 71% of its contemporaries.