| Title |
Patients’ experiences of chronic non-malignant musculoskeletal pain: a qualitative systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of General Practice, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3399/bjgp13x675412 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Francine Toye, Kate Seers, Nick Allcock, Michelle Briggs, Eloise Carr, JoyAnn Andrews, Karen Barker |
| Abstract |
Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain is one of the most predominant types of pain and accounts for a large portion of the primary care workload. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 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 Kingdom | 14 | 38% |
| Australia | 2 | 5% |
| United States | 2 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 3% |
| Norway | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 30 | 81% |
| Scientists | 6 | 16% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 174 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 39 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 13% |
| Researcher | 17 | 9% |
| Other | 13 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 33 | 18% |
| Unknown | 44 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 33 | 18% |
| Psychology | 16 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 9% |
| Unknown | 47 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 06 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,019,191
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#485
of 4,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,819
of 310,031 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#5
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,352 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 310,031 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.