| Title |
The effectiveness of walking as an intervention for low back pain: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Spine Journal, April 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00586-010-1412-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
P. Hendrick, A. M. Te Wake, A. S. Tikkisetty, L. Wulff, C. Yap, S. Milosavljevic |
| Abstract |
As current low back pain (LBP) guidelines do not specifically advocate walking as an intervention, this review has explored for the effectiveness of walking in managing acute and chronic LBP. CINAHL, Medline, AMED, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane and Scopus databases, as well as a hand search of reference lists of retrieved articles, were searched. The search was restricted to studies in the English language. Studies were included when walking was identified as an intervention. Four studies met inclusion criteria, and were assessed with a quality checklist. Three lower ranked studies reported a reduction in LBP from a walking intervention, while the highest ranked study observed no effect. Heterogeneity of study design made it difficult to draw comparisons between studies. There is only low-moderate evidence for walking as an effective intervention strategy for LBP. Further investigation is required to investigate the strength of effect for walking as a primary intervention in the management of acute and chronic LBP. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 2 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| United States | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 200 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Ghana | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 195 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 33 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 30 | 15% |
| Other | 15 | 8% |
| Researcher | 15 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 8% |
| Other | 50 | 25% |
| Unknown | 42 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 66 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 30 | 15% |
| Sports and Recreations | 19 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 20 | 10% |
| Unknown | 51 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 07 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,707,396
of 25,634,695 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#137
of 5,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,775
of 104,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#1
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,634,695 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,320 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 104,611 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 30 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 96% of its contemporaries.