↓ Skip to main content

Long-term effect of high-intensity laser therapy in the treatment of patients with chronic low back pain: a randomized blinded placebo-controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Lasers in Medical Science, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
183 Mendeley
Title
Long-term effect of high-intensity laser therapy in the treatment of patients with chronic low back pain: a randomized blinded placebo-controlled trial
Published in
Lasers in Medical Science, November 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10103-013-1472-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohamed Salaheldien Mohamed Alayat, Azza Mohamed Atya, Mohamed Mohamed Ebrahim Ali, Tamer Mohamed Shosha

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT), alone or combined with exercise, in the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP). A total of 72 male patients participated in this study, with a mean (SD) age of 32.81 (4.48) years. Patients were randomly assigned into three groups and treated with HILT plus exercise (HILT + EX), placebo laser plus exercise (PL + EX), and HILT alone in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The outcomes measured were lumbar range of motion (ROM), pain level by visual analog scale (VAS), and functional disability by both the Roland Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) and the Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (MODQ). Statistical analyses were performed to compare the differences between baseline and post-treatment measurements. The level of statistical significance was set as P < 0.05. ROM significantly increased after 4 weeks of treatment in all groups, then significantly decreased after 12 weeks of follow-up, but was still significantly more than the baseline value in groups 1 and 2. VAS, RDQ, and MODQ results showed significant decrease post-treatment in all groups, although the RDQ and MODQ results were not significantly different between groups 2 and 3. HILT combined with exercise appears to be more effective in patients with CLBP than either HLLT alone or placebo laser with exercise.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 183 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 182 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 14%
Student > Master 21 11%
Researcher 18 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 8%
Other 13 7%
Other 32 17%
Unknown 58 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 17%
Sports and Recreations 7 4%
Neuroscience 7 4%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 61 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 16 September 2020.
All research outputs
#6,127,772
of 22,733,113 outputs
Outputs from Lasers in Medical Science
#188
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,410
of 213,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lasers in Medical Science
#5
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,733,113 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,303 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 213,830 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.