| Title |
The ESSKA‐AFAS international consensus statement on peroneal tendon pathologies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00167-018-4971-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pim A. van Dijk, David Miller, James Calder, Christopher W. DiGiovanni, John G. Kennedy, Gino M. Kerkhoffs, Akos Kynsburtg, Daniel Havercamp, Stephane Guillo, Xavier M. Oliva, Chris J. Pearce, Helder Pereira, Pietro Spennacchio, Joanna M. Stephen, C. Niek van Dijk |
| Abstract |
Peroneal tendon injuries are a significant cause of lateral ankle symptoms in the active population. Accurate diagnosis and prompt treatment is important for minimizing the risk of long-term sequelae associated with chronic peroneal tendinopathy. Although several studies have been published on diagnostic strategies and treatment outcomes, there is no consensus on the optimal management of peroneal tendon pathologies. The purpose of this ESSKA-AFAS consensus statement was to conduct an international and multidisciplinary agreed guideline on management of patients with peroneal tendon pathologies. Using the Nominal Group Technique, a panel comprised of sixteen specialists spanning nine countries was convened by the ESSKA-AFAS board. In preparation for the meeting, relevant questions were identified and supported by a systematic literature search. During the meeting, the panel members gave presentations on each question, and the evidence supporting each subject was then vetted by open discussion. Statements were thereafter adjusted on the basis of the discussion and voted upon to determine consensus using a 0-10 range Likert scale. Agreement was confirmed when a mean score of at least 7.5 was reached. This ESSKA-AFAS consensus statement on the optimal management of peroneal tendon pathologies is the result of international and multidisciplinary agreement combined with a systematic review of the literature. V. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 33% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 7% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Canada | 1 | 7% |
| Ireland | 1 | 7% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 7% |
| Germany | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 27% |
| Scientists | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 114 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 18% |
| Researcher | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 18 | 16% |
| Unknown | 42 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 13% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 3% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 47 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 26 May 2022.
All research outputs
#2,142,947
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#203
of 2,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,560
of 328,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#5
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,728 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 328,993 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.