↓ Skip to main content

Hamstring injuries: update article

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (English Edition), June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#7 of 129)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
14 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
406 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.
Title
Hamstring injuries: update article
Published in
Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (English Edition), June 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.rboe.2017.05.005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucio Ernlund, Lucas de Almeida Vieira

Abstract

Hamstring (HS) muscle injuries are the most common injury in sports. They are correlated to long rehabilitations and have a great tendency to recur. The HS consist of the long head of the biceps femoris, semitendinosus, and semimembranosus. The patient's clinical presentation depends on the characteristics of the lesion, which may vary from strain to avulsions of the proximal insertion. The most recognized risk factor is a previous injury. Magnetic resonance imaging is the method of choice for the injury diagnosis and classification. Many classification systems have been proposed; the current classifications aim to describe the injury and correlate it to the prognosis. The treatment is conservative, with the use of anti-inflammatory drugs in the acute phase followed by a muscle rehabilitation program. Proximal avulsions have shown better results with surgical repair. When the patient is pain free, shows recovery of strength and muscle flexibility, and can perform the sport's movements, he/she is able to return to play. Prevention programs based on eccentric strengthening of the muscles have been indicated both to prevent the initial injury as well as preventing recurrence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 406 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 406 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 106 26%
Student > Master 44 11%
Student > Postgraduate 23 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 5%
Other 44 11%
Unknown 151 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 89 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 71 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 65 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 1%
Engineering 4 <1%
Other 15 4%
Unknown 157 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 21 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,934,155
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (English Edition)
#7
of 129 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,871
of 334,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (English Edition)
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 129 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 334,925 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.