↓ Skip to main content

Exercise for osteoarthritis of the knee

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2008
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 (88th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
328 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 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
Exercise for osteoarthritis of the knee
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2008
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004376.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marlene Fransen, Sara McConnell, Fransen, Marlene, McConnell, Sara

Abstract

Biomechanical factors, such as reduced muscle strength and joint malalignment, have an important role in the initiation and progression of knee osteoarthritis (OA). Currently, there is no known cure for OA; however, disease-related factors, such as impaired muscle function and reduced fitness, are potentially amenable to therapeutic exercise. To determine whether land-based therapeutic exercise is beneficial for people with knee OA in terms of reduced joint pain or improved physical function. Five electronic databases were searched, up until December 2007. All randomized controlled trials randomising individuals and comparing some form of land-based therapeutic exercise (as opposed to exercises conducted in the water) with a non-exercise group. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. All analyses were conducted on continuous outcomes. The 32 included studies provided data on 3616 participants for knee pain and 3719 participants for self-reported physical function. Meta-analysis revealed a beneficial treatment effect with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of 0.40 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30 to 0.50) for pain; and SMD 0.37 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.49) for physical function. There was marked variability across the included studies in participants recruited, symptom duration, exercise interventions assessed and important aspects of study methodology. The results were sensitive to the number of direct supervision occasions provided and various aspects of study methodology. While the pooled beneficial effects of exercise programs providing less than 12 direct supervision occasions or studies utilising more rigorous methodologies remained significant and clinically relevant, between study heterogeneity remained marked and the magnitude of the treatment effect of these studies would be considered small. There is platinum level evidence that land-based therapeutic exercise has at least short term benefit in terms of reduced knee pain and improved physical function for people with knee OA. The magnitude of the treatment effect would be considered small, but comparable to estimates reported for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 2%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Sweden 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 109 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 19%
Student > Bachelor 16 14%
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 28 24%
Unknown 12 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 12%
Sports and Recreations 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 17 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 23 October 2014.
All research outputs
#1,890,729
of 15,306,190 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,581
of 11,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,784
of 257,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#237
of 493 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,306,190 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 11,168 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 257,211 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 493 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 51% of its contemporaries.