↓ Skip to main content

Anterior cruciate ligament repair with LARS (ligament advanced reinforcement system): a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Rehabilitation, Therapy & Technology, December 2010
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 (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Anterior cruciate ligament repair with LARS (ligament advanced reinforcement system): a systematic review
Published in
Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Rehabilitation, Therapy & Technology, December 2010
DOI 10.1186/1758-2555-2-29
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zuzana Machotka, Ian Scarborough, Will Duncan, Saravana Kumar, Luke Perraton, Machotka Z, Scarborough I, Duncan W, Kumar S, Perraton L, Machotka, Zuzana, Scarborough, Ian, Duncan, Will, Kumar, Saravana, Perraton, Luke

Abstract

Injury to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) of the knee is common. Following complete rupture of the ACL, insufficient re-vascularization of the ligament prevents it from healing completely, creating a need for reconstruction. A variety of grafts are available for use in ACL reconstruction surgery, including synthetic grafts. Over the last two decades new types of synthetic ligaments have been developed. One of these synthetic ligaments, the Ligament Advanced Reinforcement System (LARS), has recently gained popularity.The aim of this systematic review was to assess the current best available evidence for the effectiveness of the LARS as a surgical option for symptomatic, anterior cruciate ligament rupture in terms of graft stability, rehabilitation time and return to pre-injury function.

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 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 96 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 19%
Student > Bachelor 17 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Researcher 9 9%
Lecturer 8 8%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 18 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 39%
Engineering 18 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Sports and Recreations 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 23 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 01 May 2015.
All research outputs
#1,190,603
of 7,027,828 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Rehabilitation, Therapy & Technology
#7
of 50 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,346
of 112,893 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Rehabilitation, Therapy & Technology
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,027,828 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 50 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one scored the same or higher as 43 of them.
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 112,893 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them