↓ Skip to main content

The myth of core stability

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Bodywork & Movement Therapies, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#10 of 1,545)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
141 X users
facebook
15 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
4 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
146 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1603 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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.
Title
The myth of core stability
Published in
Journal of Bodywork & Movement Therapies, January 2010
DOI 10.1016/j.jbmt.2009.08.001
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eyal Lederman

Abstract

The principle of core stability has gained wide acceptance in training for the prevention of injury and as a treatment modality for rehabilitation of various musculoskeletal conditions in particular of the lower back. There has been surprisingly little criticism of this approach up to date. This article re-examines the original findings and the principles of core stability/spinal stabilisation approaches and how well they fare within the wider knowledge of motor control, prevention of injury and rehabilitation of neuromuscular and musculoskeletal systems following injury.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 141 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 1,603 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 17 1%
Brazil 8 <1%
United Kingdom 8 <1%
Germany 7 <1%
Canada 6 <1%
Netherlands 5 <1%
Australia 4 <1%
Spain 4 <1%
Italy 4 <1%
Other 24 1%
Unknown 1516 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 300 19%
Student > Bachelor 248 15%
Other 179 11%
Student > Postgraduate 126 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 114 7%
Other 396 25%
Unknown 240 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 569 35%
Sports and Recreations 333 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 244 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 48 3%
Social Sciences 33 2%
Other 108 7%
Unknown 268 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 130. 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 16 February 2024.
All research outputs
#322,107
of 25,507,011 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Bodywork & Movement Therapies
#10
of 1,545 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,029
of 173,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Bodywork & Movement Therapies
#1
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,507,011 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,545 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 173,177 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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 99% of its contemporaries.