↓ Skip to main content

Heterogeneity of the definition of elderly age in current orthopaedic research

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
255 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
Heterogeneity of the definition of elderly age in current orthopaedic research
Published in
SpringerPlus, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40064-015-1307-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sanjeeve Sabharwal, Helen Wilson, Peter Reilly, Chinmay M. Gupte

Abstract

Medical research often defines a person as elderly when they are 65 years of age or above, however defining elderly age by chronology alone has its limitations. Moreover, potential variability in definitions of elderly age can make interpretation of the collective body of evidence within a particular field of research confusing. Our research goals were to (1) evaluate published orthopaedic research and determine whether there is variability in proposed definitions of an elderly person, and (2) to determine whether variability exists within the important research sub-group of hip fractures. A defined search protocol was used within PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library that identified orthopaedic research articles published in 2012 that stated within their objective, intent to examine an intervention in an elderly population. 80 studies that included 271,470 patients were identified and subject to analysis. Four (5 %) studies failed to define their elderly population. The remaining 76 (95 %) studies all defined elderly age by chronology alone. Definitions of an elderly person ranged from 50 to 80 years and above. The most commonly used age to define an elderly person was 65, however this accounted for only 38 (47.5 %) of studies. Orthopedic research appears to favor defining elderly age by chronology alone, and there is considerable heterogeneity amongst these definitions. This may confuse interpretation of the evidence base in areas of orthopaedic research that focus on elderly patients. The findings of this study underline the importance of future research in orthopaedics adopting validated frailty index measures so that population descriptions in older patients are more uniform and clinically relevant.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 255 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 254 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 34 13%
Student > Master 28 11%
Student > Postgraduate 18 7%
Researcher 13 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 4%
Other 38 15%
Unknown 113 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 11%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Psychology 5 2%
Other 31 12%
Unknown 124 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 October 2015.
All research outputs
#13,956,905
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#737
of 1,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,715
of 272,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#46
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 272,396 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 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.