↓ Skip to main content

Low-level laser therapy and exercise for patients with shoulder disorders in physiotherapy practice (a systematic review protocol)

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, April 2015
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
5 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Low-level laser therapy and exercise for patients with shoulder disorders in physiotherapy practice (a systematic review protocol)
Published in
Systematic Reviews, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13643-015-0050-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adedapo W Awotidebe, Gakeemah Inglis-Jassiem, Taryn Young

Abstract

Low-level laser therapy is one of the adjunct treatments of choice with exercise therapy for shoulder rehabilitation in physiotherapy clinical practices. Although previous reviews have found little use of low-level laser therapy, there are recent trials whose findings are yet to be systematically reviewed. We plan to do a systematic review to assess the effects of low-level laser therapy with exercise and exercise alone in participants who are 18 years and above, with a clinical or radiological diagnosis of various shoulder pathologies. We will search CENTRAL, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PEDro, Science Direct, Scopus and Physiotherapy Choices regardless of publication status. We will hand search for subject-specific journals (PhotoMedicine and Laser Surgery, Lasers in Surgery and Medicine and Journals of Lasers in Medical Science) and conference proceedings of World Association for Laser Therapy. Two review authors will independently screen, select studies, extract data and assess the risk of bias based on a priori criteria. Disagreements between review authors will be resolved either through discussion or consultation with a third review author. If there are at least two clinically homogeneous studies, we will perform meta-analysis. The findings will shed more light on the benefit of low-level laser therapy as an adjunct treatment to exercise in the management of shoulder disorders. The findings may also inform decision makers in the review and development of guidelines for shoulder rehabilitation in physiotherapy practices. PROSPERO CRD42014013691.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 25%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Other 6 8%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 3%
Unspecified 2 3%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 11 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 14 December 2017.
All research outputs
#960,318
of 12,298,022 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#213
of 955 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,750
of 226,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#6
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,298,022 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 955 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 226,359 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.