↓ Skip to main content

Pain and disability following first-time lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative disorders: a systematic review protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Pain and disability following first-time lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative disorders: a systematic review protocol
Published in
Systematic Reviews, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13643-016-0252-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Niek Koenders, Alison Rushton, Nicola Heneghan, Martin L. Verra, Paul Willems, Thomas Hoogeboom, J Bart Staal

Abstract

Lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine is frequently used, despite current research presenting inconclusive evidence. This study aims to systematically review and meta-analyse the natural course of pain and disability in patients with degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine such as spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, disc herniation, or discogenic low back pain to improve lumbar spinal fusion management. An electronic database search will be conducted up to 30 September 2015 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ZETOC database. In addition, a search for articles in press and published ahead of print, British National Bibliography for Report Literature, and OpenGrey will be conducted. Prospective cohort studies using outcome measures of pain and disability will be eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers will screen titles, abstracts, and full-text independently using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The risk of bias of included studies will be assessed with the modified version of the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. If meta-analysis of outcome data is deemed appropriate, variance-weighted pooled means will be calculated. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis may improve understanding of recovery after lumbar spinal fusion and improve lumbar spinal fusion management. PROSPERO CRD42015026922.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Student > Master 5 10%
Other 3 6%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 5 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 18%
Sports and Recreations 4 8%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 6 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 August 2017.
All research outputs
#10,273,868
of 11,580,830 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#810
of 859 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,158
of 265,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#40
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,580,830 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 859 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 265,334 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.