↓ Skip to main content

Spinal manipulative therapy for low‐back pain

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2013
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 (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
265 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Spinal manipulative therapy for low‐back pain
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000447.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Willem JJ Assendelft, Sally C Morton, Emily I Yu, Marika J Suttorp, Paul G Shekelle

Abstract

Low-back pain is a costly illness for which spinal manipulative therapy is commonly recommended. Previous systematic reviews and practice guidelines have reached discordant results on the effectiveness of this therapy for low-back pain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 265 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 3 1%
United States 3 1%
Australia 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 251 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 41 15%
Student > Bachelor 31 12%
Other 24 9%
Researcher 21 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 7%
Other 70 26%
Unknown 59 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 103 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 36 14%
Sports and Recreations 12 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 3%
Neuroscience 8 3%
Other 26 10%
Unknown 71 27%
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 03 January 2022.
All research outputs
#1,871,189
of 25,729,842 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,987
of 13,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,422
of 292,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#38
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,729,842 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 13,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. 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 292,710 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.