↓ Skip to main content

Amputees and Sports

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
132 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
362 Mendeley
Title
Amputees and Sports
Published in
Sports Medicine, October 2012
DOI 10.2165/11590420-000000000-00000
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mihail Bragaru, Rienk Dekker, Jan H. B. Geertzen, Pieter U. Dijkstra

Abstract

Amputation of a limb may have a negative impact on the psychological and physical well-being, mobility and social life of individuals with limb amputations. Participation in sports and/or regular physical activity has a positive effect on the above mentioned areas in able-bodied individuals. Data concerning participation in sports or regular physical activity together with its benefits and risks for individuals with limb amputations are scarce. No systematic review exists that addresses a wide range of outcomes such as biomechanics, cardiopulmonary function, psychology, sport participation and sport injuries. Therefore, the aim of this article is to systematically review the literature about individuals with limb amputations and sport participation. MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL® and SportDiscus® were searched without time or language restrictions using free text words and MeSH terms. The last search date was 31 March 2010. Books, internet sites and references of included papers were checked for papers relevant to the topic under review. Papers were included if the research topic concerned sports and a minimum of ten individuals with limb amputations were part of the study population. Papers were excluded if they included individuals with amputations of body parts other than upper or lower limbs or more distal than the wrist or ankle, or if they consisted of case reports, narrative reviews, books, notes or letters to the editor. Title, abstract and full-text assessments were performed by two independent observers following a list of preset criteria. Of the 3689 papers originally identified, 47 were included in the review. Most of the included studies were older than 10 years and had cross-sectional designs. Study participants were generally younger and often had more traumatic amputations than the general population of individuals with limb amputations. Heterogeneity in population characteristics, intervention types and main outcomes made data pooling impossible. In general, sports were associated with a beneficial effect on the cardiopulmonary system, psychological well-being, social reintegration and physical functioning. Younger individuals with unilateral transtibial amputations achieve better athletic performance and encounter fewer problems when participating in sports compared with older individuals with bilateral transfemoral amputations. Regardless of their amputation level, individuals with limb amputations participate in a wide range of recreational activities. The majority of them were not aware of the sport facilities in their area and were not informed about available recreational activities. Sport prosthetic devices were used mostly by competitive athletes. For football, the injury rate and pattern of the players with an amputation were similar to those of able-bodied players. Individuals with limb amputations appear to benefit both physically and psychologically from participation in sports and/or regular physical activity. Therefore, sports should be included in rehabilitation programmes, and individuals with limb amputations should be encouraged to pursue a physically active life following hospital discharge.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 362 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 356 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 69 19%
Student > Bachelor 53 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 10%
Researcher 34 9%
Other 21 6%
Other 56 15%
Unknown 94 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 16%
Sports and Recreations 56 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 50 14%
Engineering 19 5%
Psychology 18 5%
Other 48 13%
Unknown 114 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 13 May 2022.
All research outputs
#8,262,445
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#2,248
of 2,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,033
of 192,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#516
of 831 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.8. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 192,635 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 831 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.