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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comparison of patient‐reported outcomes among those who chose ACL reconstruction or non‐surgical treatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1111/sms.12707 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
C. L. Ardern, S. Sonesson, M. Forssblad, J. Kvist |
| Abstract |
The aim of our study was to cross-sectionally compare patient-reported knee function outcomes between people who chose non-surgical treatment for ACL injury and those who chose ACL reconstruction. We extracted Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and EuroQoL-5D data entered into the Swedish National ACL Registry by patients with a non-surgically treated ACL injury within 180 days of injury (n = 306), 1 (n = 350), 2 (n = 358), and 5 years (n = 114) after injury. These data were compared cross-sectionally to data collected pre-operatively (n = 306) and at 1 (n = 350), 2 (n = 358), and 5 years (n = 114) post-operatively from age- and gender-matched groups of patients with primary ACL reconstruction. At the 1 and 2 year comparisons, patients who chose surgical treatment reported superior quality of life and function in sports (1 year mean difference 12.4 and 13.2 points, respectively; 2 year mean difference 4.5 and 6.9 points, respectively) compared to those who chose non-surgical treatment. Patients who chose ACL reconstruction reported superior outcomes for knee symptoms and function, and in knee-specific and health-related quality of life, compared to patients who chose non-surgical treatment. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 162 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 9% |
| Researcher | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 28 | 17% |
| Unknown | 43 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 55 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 27 | 17% |
| Sports and Recreations | 13 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 3% |
| Unknown | 56 | 35% |
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 24 June 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports
#2,407
of 2,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,976
of 368,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports
#42
of 49 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 2,945 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.3. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 368,647 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.