↓ Skip to main content

Bilateral Cervical Dysfunction in Patients With Unilateral Lateral Epicondylalgia Without Concomitant Cervical or Upper Limb Symptoms: A Cross-Sectional Case-Control Study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
21 X users
facebook
6 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
147 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
Bilateral Cervical Dysfunction in Patients With Unilateral Lateral Epicondylalgia Without Concomitant Cervical or Upper Limb Symptoms: A Cross-Sectional Case-Control Study
Published in
Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics, December 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.jmpt.2013.12.005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brooke K. Coombes, Leanne Bisset, Bill Vicenzino

Abstract

The purposes of this study were to examine the prevalence and distribution of spinal and neurodynamic dysfunction in a population with unilateral lateral epicondylalgia (LE) without concomitant cervical or upper limb symptoms, compare with cervical examination in a healthy control population, and investigate potential associations with clinical and demographic factors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 142 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 18%
Student > Bachelor 24 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 7%
Other 10 7%
Other 33 22%
Unknown 31 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 22%
Sports and Recreations 9 6%
Physics and Astronomy 3 2%
Philosophy 2 1%
Other 12 8%
Unknown 38 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 26 February 2022.
All research outputs
#1,953,671
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics
#126
of 1,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,569
of 319,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics
#4
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 319,357 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.