↓ Skip to main content

Sitting versus standing: Does the intradiscal pressure cause disc degeneration or low back pain?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Electromyography & Kinesiology, March 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#37 of 1,140)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
20 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
302 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Sitting versus standing: Does the intradiscal pressure cause disc degeneration or low back pain?
Published in
Journal of Electromyography & Kinesiology, March 2007
DOI 10.1016/j.jelekin.2006.10.011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew Claus, Julie Hides, G. Lorimer Moseley, Paul Hodges

Abstract

Studies of lumbar intradiscal pressure (IDP) in standing and upright sitting have mostly reported higher pressures in sitting. It was assumed clinically that flexion of the lumbar spine in sitting relative to standing, caused higher IDP, disc degeneration or rupture, and low back pain. IDP indicates axial compressive load upon a non-degenerate disc, but provides little or no indication of shear, axial rotation or bending. This review is presented in two main parts. First, in vivo IDP data in standing and upright sitting for non-degenerate discs are comprehensively reviewed. As methodology, results and interpretations varied between IDP studies, in vivo studies measuring spinal shrinkage and spinal internal-fixator loads to infer axial compressive load to the discs are also reviewed. When data are considered together, it is clear that IDP is often similar in standing and sitting. Secondly, clinical assumptions related to IDP in sitting are considered in light of basic and epidemiologic studies. Current studies indicate that IDP in sitting is unlikely to pose a threat to non-degenerate discs, and sitting is no worse than standing for disc degeneration or low back pain incidence. If sitting is a greater threat for development of low back pain than standing, the mechanism is unlikely to be raised IDP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 302 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
Malaysia 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
New Zealand 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Other 5 2%
Unknown 279 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 48 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 14%
Student > Master 35 12%
Other 34 11%
Researcher 23 8%
Other 70 23%
Unknown 49 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 106 35%
Engineering 40 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 10%
Sports and Recreations 25 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 6%
Other 25 8%
Unknown 59 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 08 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,331,095
of 25,528,120 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Electromyography & Kinesiology
#37
of 1,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,626
of 89,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Electromyography & Kinesiology
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,528,120 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,140 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 89,923 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them