| Title |
Biomechanical considerations in the pathogenesis of osteoarthritis of the knee
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00167-011-1818-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andras Heijink, Andreas H. Gomoll, Henning Madry, Matej Drobnič, Giuseppe Filardo, João Espregueira‐Mendes, C. Niek Van Dijk |
| Abstract |
Osteoarthritis is the most common joint disease and a major cause of disability. The knee is the large joint most affected. While chronological age is the single most important risk factor of osteoarthritis, the pathogenesis of knee osteoarthritis in the young patient is predominantly related to an unfavorable biomechanical environment at the joint. This results in mechanical demand that exceeds the ability of a joint to repair and maintain itself, predisposing the articular cartilage to premature degeneration. This review examines the available basic science, preclinical and clinical evidence regarding several such unfavorable biomechanical conditions about the knee: malalignment, loss of meniscal tissue, cartilage defects and joint instability or laxity. Level of evidence IV. |
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 | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 467 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 457 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 79 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 70 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 67 | 14% |
| Researcher | 47 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 30 | 6% |
| Other | 94 | 20% |
| Unknown | 80 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 163 | 35% |
| Engineering | 58 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 33 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 29 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 21 | 4% |
| Other | 58 | 12% |
| Unknown | 105 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 April 2018.
All research outputs
#14,783,222
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#1,738
of 2,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,736
of 241,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#27
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,642 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 241,747 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 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 50% of its contemporaries.