↓ Skip to main content

Asymptomatic population reference values for three knee patient-reported outcomes measures: evaluation of an electronic data collection system and implications for future international, multi-centre…

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Asymptomatic population reference values for three knee patient-reported outcomes measures: evaluation of an electronic data collection system and implications for future international, multi-centre cohort studies
Published in
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00402-018-2874-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

James M. McLean, Oscar Brumby-Rendell, Ryan Lisle, Jacob Brazier, Kieran Dunn, Tiffany Gill, Catherine L. Hill, Daniel Mandziak, Jordan Leith

Abstract

The aim was to assess whether the Knee Society Score, Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) were comparable in asymptomatic, healthy, individuals of different age, gender and ethnicity, across two remote continents. The purpose of this study was to establish normal population values for these scores using an electronic data collection system. There is no difference in clinical knee scores in an asymptomatic population when comparing age, gender and ethnicity, across two remote continents. 312 Australian and 314 Canadian citizens, aged 18-94 years, with no active knee pain, injury or pathology in the ipsilateral knee corresponding to their dominant arm, were evaluated. A knee examination was performed and participants completed an electronically administered questionnaire covering the subjective components of the knee scores. The cohorts were age- and gender-matched. Chi-square tests, Fisher's exact test and Poisson regression models were used where appropriate, to investigate the association between knee scores, age, gender, ethnicity and nationality. There was a significant inverse relationship between age and all assessment tools. OKS recorded a significant difference between gender with females scoring on average 1% lower score. There was no significant difference between international cohorts when comparing all assessment tools. An electronic, multi-centre data collection system can be effectively utilized to assess remote international cohorts. Differences in gender, age, ethnicity and nationality should be taken into consideration when using knee scores to compare to pathological patient scores. This study has established an electronic, normal control group for future studies using the Knee society, Oxford, and KOOS knee scores. Diagnostic Level II.

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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 21%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 15 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 12%
Psychology 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 03 May 2018.
All research outputs
#18,550,468
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery
#912
of 1,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#316,503
of 447,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery
#13
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,215 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 447,041 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.