| Title |
The Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioural Treatment for Non-Specific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0134192 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Helen Richmond, Amanda M. Hall, Bethan Copsey, Zara Hansen, Esther Williamson, Nicolette Hoxey-Thomas, Zafra Cooper, Sarah E Lamb |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 72 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 | 15 | 21% |
| Japan | 5 | 7% |
| United States | 5 | 7% |
| Australia | 5 | 7% |
| Spain | 4 | 6% |
| France | 3 | 4% |
| Singapore | 2 | 3% |
| Canada | 2 | 3% |
| Denmark | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 24 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 53 | 74% |
| Scientists | 14 | 19% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 4% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 338 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 334 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 68 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 55 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 22 | 7% |
| Other | 20 | 6% |
| Other | 61 | 18% |
| Unknown | 86 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 81 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 66 | 20% |
| Psychology | 32 | 9% |
| Sports and Recreations | 14 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 4% |
| Other | 25 | 7% |
| Unknown | 108 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. 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 17 August 2022.
All research outputs
#879,731
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#11,501
of 224,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,682
of 277,480 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#279
of 6,222 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 277,480 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,222 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 95% of its contemporaries.