↓ Skip to main content

Total or Partial Knee Arthroplasty Trial - TOPKAT: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, 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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
18 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 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
Total or Partial Knee Arthroplasty Trial - TOPKAT: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Published in
Trials, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-14-292
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Beard, Andrew Price, Jonathan Cook, Ray Fitzpatrick, Andrew Carr, Marion Campbell, Helen Doll, Helen Campbell, Nigel Arden, Cushla Cooper, Loretta Davies, David Murray

Abstract

In the majority of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee the disease originates in the medial compartment. There are two fundamentally different approaches to knee replacement for patients with unicompartmental disease: some surgeons feel that it is always best to replace both the knee compartments with a total knee replacement (TKR); whereas others feel it is best to replace just the damaged component of the knee using a partial or unicompartment replacement (UKR). Both interventions are established and well-documented procedures. Little evidence exists to prove the clinical and cost-effectiveness of either management option. This provides an explanation for the high variation in treatment of choice by individual surgeons for the same knee pathology.The aim of the TOPKAT study will be to assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of TKRs compared to UKRs in patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
United States 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 94 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 18%
Student > Master 13 13%
Other 11 11%
Student > Postgraduate 10 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 21 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 52%
Engineering 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 30 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 29 May 2019.
All research outputs
#1,814,489
of 15,922,017 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#695
of 4,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,932
of 265,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#9
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,922,017 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,204 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 265,459 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 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.