↓ Skip to main content

Therapeutic ultrasound for osteoarthritis of the knee

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2001
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)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Therapeutic ultrasound for osteoarthritis of the knee
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2001
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003132
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vivian Welch, Lucie Brosseau, Joan Peterson, Beverley Shea, Peter Tugwell, George A Wells, Welch, V, Brosseau, L, Peterson, J, Shea, B, Tugwell, P, Wells, G

Abstract

Therapeutic ultrasound is one of several physical therapy modalities suggested for the management of pain and loss of function due to OA. To assess the effectiveness of therapeutic ultrasound therapy for treating OA. We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group trials register, and MEDLINE, up to the end of December 2000, using the sensitive search strategy developed by the Cochrane Collaboration. The search was complemented with bibliography searching of the reference list of the trials retrieved from the electronic search. Key experts in the area were contacted for further published and unpublished articles. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing therapeutic ultrasound against placebo or another active intervention in patients with OA were selected. Two reviewers determined the studies to be included based on inclusion and exclusion criteria (LB, VW). Data were independently abstracted by two reviewers (VW, LB), and checked by a third reviewer (BS) using a pre-developed adapted form for the OA sub-group of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group. The same two reviewers, using a validated scale, assessed the methodological quality of the RCTs and CCTs independently. OA outcome measures were extracted from the publications. The pooled analysis was performed using weighted mean differences (WMDs) for joint counts, pain, global and functional assessments. A chi-square test was used to assess heterogeneity among trials. Fixed effects models were used throughout and random effects for outcomes showing heterogeneity. Three trials, including 294 patients with knee OA were included. Only one trial (n=74) compared therapeutic ultrasound to placebo. This trial showed no difference in range of motion, pain or gait velocity after 4 weeks of therapeutic ultrasound. Two trials compared therapeutic ultrasound to an active therapy (n=220). These trials showed no statistical difference between galvanic current or short wave diathermy for the outcomes of pain and patient-assessed improvement. Ultrasound therapy appears to have no benefit over placebo or short wave diathermy for patients with knee OA. These conclusions are limited by the poor reporting of the characteristics of the device, of the population, of the OA,and therapeutic application of the ultrasound and low methodological quality of the trials included. No conclusions can be drawn about the use of ultrasound in smaller joints such as the wrists or hands.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 107 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Researcher 6 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 5%
Student > Master 4 4%
Student > Postgraduate 3 3%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 73 67%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Sports and Recreations 2 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 <1%
Physics and Astronomy 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 77 71%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 17 December 2015.
All research outputs
#1,311,068
of 13,323,590 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,831
of 10,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,334
of 190,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#82
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,323,590 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,556 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 190,368 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 210 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 60% of its contemporaries.