↓ Skip to main content

Accuracy of physical therapists' prognosis of low back pain from the clinical examination: a prospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy (Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy), June 2014
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator
podcasts
1 podcast

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Accuracy of physical therapists' prognosis of low back pain from the clinical examination: a prospective cohort study
Published in
Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy (Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy), June 2014
DOI 10.1179/2042618613y.0000000045
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Haxby Abbott, Emma-Marie Kingan

Abstract

To investigate, in patients with chronic or recurrent low back pain (LBP), the predictive validity of history items, demographic variables, outcome measure questionnaire scores, clinical examination items, and physical therapists' (PTs') summative estimation of prognosis on a four-point scale. Little is known about the ability of PTs to predict functional outcomes for patients with LBP.

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 4 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 59 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 %
South Africa 1 2%
New Zealand 1 2%
Unknown 57 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 9 15%
Other 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 13 22%
Unknown 14 24%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 27%
Unspecified 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 16 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 March 2025.
All research outputs
#4,418,941
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy (Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy)
#187
of 698 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,612
of 275,790 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy (Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy)
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 698 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. 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 275,790 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them