| Title |
Physiotherapy for Parkinson's disease: a comparison of techniques
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd002815.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Claire L Tomlinson, Clare P Herd, Carl E Clarke, Charmaine Meek, Smitaa Patel, Rebecca Stowe, Katherine HO Deane, Laila Shah, Catherine M Sackley, Keith Wheatley, Natalie Ives |
| Abstract |
Despite medical therapies and surgical interventions for Parkinson's disease (PD), patients develop progressive disability. The role of physiotherapy is to maximise functional ability and minimise secondary complications through movement rehabilitation within a context of education and support for the whole person. The overall aim is to optimise independence, safety and wellbeing, thereby enhancing quality of life. Trials have shown that physiotherapy has short-term benefits in PD. However, which physiotherapy intervention is most effective remains unclear. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Ireland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 974 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | <1% |
| Unknown | 955 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 164 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 140 | 14% |
| Researcher | 77 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 77 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 59 | 6% |
| Other | 179 | 18% |
| Unknown | 278 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 246 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 188 | 19% |
| Neuroscience | 42 | 4% |
| Psychology | 35 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 31 | 3% |
| Other | 123 | 13% |
| Unknown | 309 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 02 July 2021.
All research outputs
#6,721,359
of 22,757,541 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,405
of 12,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,130
of 228,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#158
of 236 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,541 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 228,185 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 236 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.