↓ Skip to main content

Balance Right in Multiple Sclerosis (BRiMS): a guided self-management programme to reduce falls and improve quality of life, balance and mobility in people with secondary progressive multiple…

Overview of attention for article published in Pilot and Feasibility Studies, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Balance Right in Multiple Sclerosis (BRiMS): a guided self-management programme to reduce falls and improve quality of life, balance and mobility in people with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: a protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial
Published in
Pilot and Feasibility Studies, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40814-017-0168-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

H. Gunn, J. Andrade, L. Paul, L. Miller, S. Creanor, C. Green, J. Marsden, P. Ewings, M. Berrow, J. Vickery, A. Barton, B. Marshall, J. Zajicek, J. A. Freeman

Abstract

Impaired mobility is a cardinal feature of multiple sclerosis (MS) and is rated by people with MS as their highest priority. By the secondary progressive phase, balance, mobility and physical activity levels are significantly compromised; an estimated 70% of people with secondary progressive MS fall regularly. Our ongoing research has systematically developed 'Balance Right in MS' (BRiMS), an innovative, manualised 13-week guided self-management programme tailored to the needs of people with MS, designed to improve safe mobility and minimise falls. Our eventual aim is to assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of BRiMS in people with secondary progressive MS by undertaking an appropriately statistically powered, multi-centre, assessor-blinded definitive, randomised controlled trial. This feasibility study will assess the acceptability of the intervention and test the achievability of running such a definitive trial. This is a pragmatic multi-centre feasibility randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment. Sixty ambulant people with secondary progressive MS who self-report two or more falls in the previous 6 months will be randomly allocated (1:1) to either the BRiMS programme plus usual care or to usual care alone. All participants will be assessed at baseline and followed up at 15 weeks and 27 weeks post-randomisation. The outcomes of this feasibility trial include:Feasibility outcomes, including trial recruitment, retention and completionAssessment of the proposed outcome measures for the anticipated definitive trial (including measures of walking, quality of life, falls, balance and activity level)Measures of adherence to the BRiMS programmeData to inform the economic evaluation in a future trialProcess evaluation (assessment of treatment fidelity and qualitative evaluation of participant and treating therapist experience). The BRiMS intervention aims to address a key concern for MS service users and providers. However, there are several uncertainties which need to be addressed prior to progressing to a full-scale trial, including acceptability of the BRiMS intervention and practicality of the trial procedures. This feasibility trial will provide important insights to resolve these uncertainties and will enable a protocol to be finalised for use in the definitive trial. ISRCTN13587999.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Researcher 10 9%
Other 7 7%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 30 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 21%
Psychology 7 7%
Sports and Recreations 6 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 35 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 31 July 2017.
All research outputs
#5,723,461
of 23,316,003 outputs
Outputs from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#354
of 1,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,267
of 318,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#10
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,316,003 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 318,123 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 62% of its contemporaries.