↓ Skip to main content

A patient's recollection of pre-operative status is not accurate one year after arthroplasty of the hip or knee.

Overview of attention for article published in The Bone & Joint Journal, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
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
A patient's recollection of pre-operative status is not accurate one year after arthroplasty of the hip or knee.
Published in
The Bone & Joint Journal, August 2015
DOI 10.1302/0301-620x.97b8.35809
Pubmed ID
Authors

M T Murphy, R Vardi, S F Journeaux, S L Whitehouse

Abstract

If patients could recall their physical status before total hip (THA) or knee arthroplasty (TKA) accurately it could have valuable applications both clinically and for research. This study evaluated the accuracy of a patient's recollection one year after either THA or TKA using the Oxford hip or knee scores (OHS and OKS). In total, 113 patients (59 THA, 54 TKA) who had completed the appropriate score pre-operatively were asked to complete the score again at a mean of 12.4 months (standard deviation (sd) 0.8) after surgery, recalling their pre-operative state. While there were no significant differences between the actual and recalled pre-operative scores (OHS mean difference 0.8, sd 6.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.82 to 2.42, p = 0.329; OKS mean difference -0.11, sd 7.34, 95% CI -2.11 to 1.89, p = 0.912), absolute differences were relatively large (OHS, 5.24; OKS, 5.41), correlation was weak (OHS r = 0.7, OKS r = 0.61) and agreement between actual and recalled responses for individual questions was poor in half of the OHS and two thirds of the OKS. A patient's recollection of pre-operative pain and function is inaccurate one year after THA or TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1070-5.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 5%
Unknown 21 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 18%
Student > Postgraduate 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Other 5 23%
Unknown 4 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Unknown 7 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 August 2015.
All research outputs
#13,082,030
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from The Bone & Joint Journal
#3,040
of 4,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,628
of 264,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Bone & Joint Journal
#29
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 264,253 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.