| Title |
Scheuermann’s disease: focus on weight and height role
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Spine Journal, February 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00586-008-0641-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
E. Fotiadis, E. Kenanidis, E. Samoladas, A. Christodoulou, P. Akritopoulos, K. Akritopoulou |
| Abstract |
The aim of this cross-sectional case-control study is the comparison of the weight and height between a group of children with Scheuermann's disease (SD) and a comparable group of healthy ones and also the correlation of them with the degree and the morphology of the kyphotic curve. Following a school-screening program of 10,057 school students, aged between 11 and 17 years old, 175 adolescents with Scheuermann's disease were diagnosed. The mean height and weight of 175 adolescents diagnosed to have SD compared with this of a group of normal children taken randomly from the group of 9,882 healthy children screened. The control group was comparable with the study group concerning age (p = 0.605) and sex. The weight, height and body mass index (BMI) were significantly lower in the healthy (control) group (p < 0.001). However, there was no correlation between weight (r = -0.019, p = 0.804), height (r = 0.053, p = 0.484) and BMI (r = -0.177, p = 0.019) with the magnitude of kyphotic curve. There was also no correlation between weight (r = -0.27, p = 0.722), height (r = -0.025, p = 0.744) and BMI (r = -0.038, p = 0.619) with Voutsinas index as well. Scheuermann's disease is probably a multifactorial skeletal deformity. Weight and height do not seem to affect the magnitude and morphology of the main kyphotic curve in SD. It seems probably that this observation is not part of the pathogenetic mechanism of SD but a result of its cascade. The increased weight and height of these patients may be the secondary result of other disturbances (i.e. hormonal), which may play more crucial role in Scheuermann's disease pathogenesis. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 23% |
| Unknown | 7 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 53% |
| Psychology | 7 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 15% |
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 02 January 2016.
All research outputs
#7,453,479
of 22,786,691 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#1,001
of 4,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,282
of 79,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#12
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,786,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,619 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 79,382 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.