↓ Skip to main content

Comparative Effect of Orthosis Design on Functional Performance

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
patent
4 patents

Readers on

mendeley
216 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
Comparative Effect of Orthosis Design on Functional Performance
Published in
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, March 2012
DOI 10.2106/jbjs.k.00254
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

High-energy extremity trauma is common in combat. Orthotic options for patients whose lower extremities have been salvaged are limited. A custom energy-storing ankle-foot orthosis, the Intrepid Dynamic Exoskeletal Orthosis (IDEO), was created and used with high-intensity rehabilitation as part of the Return to Run clinical pathway. We hypothesized that the IDEO would improve functional performance compared with a non-custom carbon fiber orthosis (BlueRocker), a posterior leaf spring orthosis, and no brace.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 216 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 %
United States 3 1%
Japan 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 211 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 17%
Student > Bachelor 27 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 13%
Researcher 21 10%
Other 12 6%
Other 35 16%
Unknown 57 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 21%
Engineering 39 18%
Sports and Recreations 17 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 4%
Other 20 9%
Unknown 71 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 19 December 2023.
All research outputs
#6,747,650
of 32,332,113 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
#2,200
of 7,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,953
of 199,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
#23
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,332,113 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,366 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 199,432 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 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 55% of its contemporaries.