↓ Skip to main content

Self-reported nonrestorative sleep in fibromyalgia – relationship to impairments of body functions, personal function factors, and quality of life

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 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
Self-reported nonrestorative sleep in fibromyalgia – relationship to impairments of body functions, personal function factors, and quality of life
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, August 2015
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s86611
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gunilla M Liedberg, Mathilda Björk, Björn Börsbo

Abstract

The purpose of this study was: 1) to determine variables that might characterize good or bad sleep; and 2) to describe the relationship between sleep, impairment of body functions, personal function factors, and quality of life based on quality of sleep in women with fibromyalgia (FM). This cross-sectional descriptive study included 224 consecutive patients diagnosed at a specialist center. These patients were mailed a questionnaire concerning sleep, body functions, personal factors, and health-related quality of life. In total, 145 completed questionnaires were collected. Using sleep variables (sleep quality, waking up unrefreshed, and tiredness when getting up), we identified two subgroups - the good sleep subgroup and the bad sleep subgroup - of women with FM. These subgroups exhibited significantly different characteristics concerning pain intensity, psychological variables (depressed mood, anxiety, catastrophizing, and self-efficacy), impairments of body functions, and generic and health-related quality of life. The good sleep subgroup reported a significantly better situation, including higher employment/study rate. The bad sleep subgroup reported a greater use of sleep medication. Five variables determined inclusion into either a good sleep or a bad sleep subgroup: pain in the evening, self-efficacy, anxiety, and according to the Short Form health survey role emotional and physical functioning. This study found that it was possible to identify two subgroups of women with FM based on quality of sleep variables. The two subgroups differed significantly with respect to pain, psychological factors, impairments of body functions, and perceived quality of life, where the subgroup with bad sleep had a worse situation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 81 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Professor 4 5%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 29 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 14%
Psychology 8 10%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 29 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 August 2015.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#1,316
of 1,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,173
of 276,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#17
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 276,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.