↓ Skip to main content

Patient-reported outcome measures for hip-related pain: a review of the available evidence and a consensus statement from the International Hip-related Pain Research Network, Zurich 2018

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Sports Medicine, February 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
64 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 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
Patient-reported outcome measures for hip-related pain: a review of the available evidence and a consensus statement from the International Hip-related Pain Research Network, Zurich 2018
Published in
British Journal of Sports Medicine, February 2020
DOI 10.1136/bjsports-2019-101456
Pubmed ID
Authors

Franco M Impellizzeri, Denise M Jones, Damian Griffin, Marcie Harris-Hayes, Kristian Thorborg, Kay M Crossley, Michael P Reiman, Mark James Scholes, Eva Ageberg, Rintje Agricola, Mario Bizzini, Nancy Bloom, Nicola C Casartelli, Laura E Diamond, Hendrik Paulus Dijkstra, Stephanie Di Stasi, Michael Drew, Daniel Jonah Friedman, Matthew Freke, Boris Gojanovic, Joshua J Heerey, Per Hölmich, Michael A Hunt, Lasse Ishøi, Ara Kassarjian, Matthew King, Peter R Lawrenson, Michael Leunig, Cara L Lewis, Kristian Marstrand Warholm, Sue Mayes, Håvard Moksnes, Andrea Britt Mosler, May Arna Risberg, Adam Semciw, Andreas Serner, Pim van Klij, Tobias Wörner, Joanne Kemp

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 64 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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 123 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 16%
Other 12 10%
Researcher 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 6%
Other 21 17%
Unknown 41 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 16%
Sports and Recreations 13 11%
Unspecified 5 4%
Computer Science 3 2%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 42 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 19 November 2021.
All research outputs
#880,432
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Sports Medicine
#1,629
of 6,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,199
of 361,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Sports Medicine
#26
of 76 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 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,241 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 64.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 361,299 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.