↓ Skip to main content

Predictive value of the DASH tool for predicting return to work of injured workers with musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity

Overview of attention for article published in Occupational and environmental medicine, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
61 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.
Article details
Title
Predictive value of the DASH tool for predicting return to work of injured workers with musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity
Published in
Occupational and environmental medicine, August 2016
DOI 10.1136/oemed-2016-103791
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To determine whether the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) tool added to the predictive ability of established prognostic factors, including patient demographic and clinical outcomes, to predict return to work (RTW) in injured workers with musculoskeletal (MSK) disorders of the upper extremity. A retrospective cohort study using a population-based database from the Workers' Compensation Board of Alberta (WCB-Alberta) that focused on claimants with upper extremity injuries was used. Besides the DASH, potential predictors included demographic, occupational, clinical and health usage variables. Outcome was receipt of compensation benefits after 3 months. To identify RTW predictors, a purposeful logistic modelling strategy was used. A series of receiver operating curve analyses were performed to determine which model provided the best discriminative ability. The sample included 3036 claimants with upper extremity injuries. The final model for predicting RTW included the total DASH score in addition to other established predictors. The area under the curve for this model was 0.77, which is interpreted as fair discrimination. This model was statistically significantly different than the model of established predictors alone (p<0.001). When comparing the DASH total score versus DASH item 23, a non-significant difference was obtained between the models (p=0.34). The DASH tool together with other established predictors significantly helped predict RTW after 3 months in participants with upper extremity MSK disorders. An appealing result for clinicians and busy researchers is that DASH item 23 has equal predictive ability to the total DASH score.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 29 48%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 13%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 36 59%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 16 November 2016.
All research outputs
#23,329,066
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from Occupational and environmental medicine
#3,186
of 3,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#217,997
of 342,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Occupational and environmental medicine
#54
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,800 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.5. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 342,408 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.