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 |
Proprioceptive change impairs balance control in older patients with low back pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Physical Therapy Science, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1589/jpts.29.1788 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tadashi Ito, Yoshihito Sakai, Kazunori Yamazaki, Kazuma Igarashi, Noritaka Sato, Kiyoko Yokoyama, Yoshifumi Morita |
| Abstract |
[Purpose] This study aims to determine the specific proprioceptive control strategy used during postural balance in older patients with low back pain (LBP) and non-LBP (NLBP) and to assess whether this strategy is related to proprioceptive decline and LBP. [Subjects and Methods] Pressure displacement center was determined in 47 older persons with LBP and 64 older persons with NLBP during upright stance on a balance board without vision. Gastrocnemius (GS) and lumbar multifidus muscle (LM) vibratory stimulations of 60 and 240-Hz, respectively, were applied to evaluate the relative contributions of different proprioceptive signals (relative proprioceptive weighting ratio, RPW) used in postural control. Age, height, weight, back muscle strength, L1/2 and L4/5 lumbar multifidus cross section area ratio, skeletal muscle mass index, sagittal vertical axis, and Roland-Morris disability questionnaire (RDQ) were evaluated. [Results] Compared with older patients with NLBP, those with LBP showed a lower RPW 240-Hz, lower L4/5 lumbar multifidus cross-sectional area ratio, and a significantly higher age and RDQ. Logistic regression analysis showed that RPW 240-Hz and age were independently associated with LBP, after controlling for confounding factors. [Conclusion] Older patients with LBP decreased their reliance on GS (RPW 240-Hz) proprioceptive signals during balance control. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 10 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 34% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 16% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 34% |
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 22 December 2019.
All research outputs
#15,173,117
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#759
of 1,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,482
of 337,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#26
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,732 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 337,396 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 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 52% of its contemporaries.