↓ Skip to main content

National clinical guidelines for non-surgical treatment of patients with recent onset neck pain or cervical radiculopathy

Overview of attention for article published in European Spine Journal, May 2017
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
53 X users
facebook
9 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
105 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
354 Mendeley
Title
National clinical guidelines for non-surgical treatment of patients with recent onset neck pain or cervical radiculopathy
Published in
European Spine Journal, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00586-017-5121-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Per Kjaer, Alice Kongsted, Jan Hartvigsen, Alexander Isenberg-Jørgensen, Berit Schiøttz-Christensen, Bolette Søborg, Charlotte Krog, Christian Martin Møller, Christine Marie Bækø Halling, Henrik Hein Lauridsen, Inge Ris Hansen, Jesper Nørregaard, Karsten Juhl Jørgensen, Lars Valentin Hansen, Marie Jakobsen, Martin Bach Jensen, Martin Melbye, Peter Duel, Steffan W. Christensen, Tina Myung Povlsen

Abstract

To summarise recommendations about 21 selected non-surgical interventions for recent onset (<12 weeks) non-specific neck pain (NP) and cervical radiculopathy (CR) based on two guidelines from the Danish Health Authority. Two multidisciplinary working groups formulated recommendations based on the GRADE approach. Twelve recommendations were based on evidence and nine on consensus. Management should include information about prognosis, warning signs, and advise to remain active. For treatment, guidelines suggest different types of supervised exercise and manual therapy; combinations of exercise and manual therapy before medicine for NP; acupuncture for NP but not CR; traction for CR; and oral NSAID (oral or topical) and Tramadol after careful consideration for NP and CR. Recommendations are based on low-quality evidence or on consensus, but are well aligned with recommendations from guidelines from North America. The working groups recommend intensifying research relating to all aspects of management of NP and CR.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 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 354 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 354 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 60 17%
Student > Bachelor 39 11%
Researcher 31 9%
Other 26 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 26 7%
Other 83 23%
Unknown 89 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 104 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 89 25%
Sports and Recreations 11 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 2%
Neuroscience 7 2%
Other 32 9%
Unknown 104 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. 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 09 March 2021.
All research outputs
#976,881
of 25,622,179 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#74
of 5,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,487
of 327,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#5
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,622,179 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 5,317 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 327,645 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 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 94% of its contemporaries.