↓ Skip to main content

Prognostic factors in non-surgically treated sciatica: A systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, September 2011
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 (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
157 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
Prognostic factors in non-surgically treated sciatica: A systematic review
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, September 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-12-208
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie Ashworth, Kika Konstantinou, Kate M Dunn

Abstract

When present sciatica is considered an obstacle to recovery in low back pain patients, yet evidence is limited regarding prognostic factors for persistent disability in this patient group. The aim of this study is to describe and summarise the evidence regarding prognostic factors for sciatica in non-surgically treated cohorts. Understanding the prognostic factors in sciatica and their relative importance may allow the identification of patients with particular risk factors who might benefit from early or specific types of treatment in order to optimise outcome.

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 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 1%
Germany 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 150 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 15%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Researcher 13 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 8%
Other 11 7%
Other 31 20%
Unknown 49 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 5%
Sports and Recreations 8 5%
Psychology 7 4%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 54 34%
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 17 April 2015.
All research outputs
#5,639,594
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,050
of 4,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,262
of 131,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#11
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 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 4,021 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 131,164 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.