↓ Skip to main content

Manipulative and Multimodal Therapy for Upper Extremity and Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
471 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
Manipulative and Multimodal Therapy for Upper Extremity and Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review
Published in
Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics, May 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.jmpt.2013.04.001
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to complete a systematic review of manual and manipulative therapy (MMT) for common upper extremity pain and disorders including the temporomandibular joint (TMJ).

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 6 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 471 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 %
Australia 2 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 462 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 86 18%
Student > Bachelor 72 15%
Other 31 7%
Student > Postgraduate 27 6%
Researcher 25 5%
Other 80 17%
Unknown 150 32%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 170 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 79 17%
Sports and Recreations 18 4%
Psychology 7 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 1%
Other 27 6%
Unknown 164 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 20 October 2017.
All research outputs
#5,899,607
of 34,581,411 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics
#325
of 1,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,880
of 243,777 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics
#8
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,581,411 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,507 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 243,777 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.