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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Influence of structural integration and fascial fitness on body image and the perception of back pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Physical Therapy Science, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1589/jpts.29.1010 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heidi Baur, Hannes Gatterer, Barbara Hotter, Martin Kopp |
| Abstract |
[Purpose] The aim of this study was to examine the influence of Structural Integration and Fascial Fitness, a new form of physical exercise, on body image and the perception of back pain. [Subjects and Methods] In total, 33 participants with non-specific back pain were split into two groups and performed three sessions of Structural Integration or Fascial Fitness within a 3-week period. Before and after the interventions, perception of back pain and body image were evaluated using standardized questionnaires. [Results] Structural Integration significantly decreased non-specified back pain and improved both "negative body image" and "vital body dynamics". Fascial Fitness led to a significant improvement on the "negative body image" subscale. Benefits of Structural Integration did not significantly vary in magnitude from those for fascial fitness. [Conclusion] Both Structural Integration and Fascial Fitness can lead to a more positive body image after only three sessions. Moreover, the therapeutic technique of Structural Integration can reduce back pain. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 19% |
| Researcher | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 14 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 17% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 8% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 14 | 39% |
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 13 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,605,790
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#693
of 1,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,776
of 331,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#19
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,732 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 331,588 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 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 58% of its contemporaries.