↓ Skip to main content

One-year treatment follow-up of plantar fasciitis: radial shockwaves vs. conventional physiotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in Clinics, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
281 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
One-year treatment follow-up of plantar fasciitis: radial shockwaves vs. conventional physiotherapy
Published in
Clinics, August 2013
DOI 10.6061/clinics/2013(08)05
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcus Vinicius Grecco, Guilherme Carlos Brech, Júlia Maria D'Andrea Greve

Abstract

To compare radial shockwave treatment with conventional physiotherapy for plantar fasciitis after 12 months of follow-up.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 281 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Unknown 277 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 60 21%
Student > Master 47 17%
Student > Postgraduate 28 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 6%
Other 42 15%
Unknown 68 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 100 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 60 21%
Sports and Recreations 14 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 1%
Other 15 5%
Unknown 80 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 November 2016.
All research outputs
#15,740,207
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#587
of 1,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,061
of 210,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#17
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,215 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 210,078 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.