↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
399 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
929 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000963.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven J Kamper, Andreas T Apeldoorn, Alessandro Chiarotto, Rob J.E.M. Smeets, Raymond WJG Ostelo, Jaime Guzman, Maurits W van Tulder

Abstract

Low back pain (LBP) is responsible for considerable personal suffering worldwide. Those with persistent disabling symptoms also contribute to substantial costs to society via healthcare expenditure and reduced work productivity. While there are many treatment options, none are universally endorsed. The idea that chronic LBP is a condition best understood with reference to an interaction of physical, psychological and social influences, the 'biopsychosocial model', has received increasing acceptance. This has led to the development of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation (MBR) programs that target factors from the different domains, administered by healthcare professionals from different backgrounds.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 74 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 929 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Norway 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 914 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 178 19%
Student > Bachelor 145 16%
Researcher 91 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 90 10%
Student > Postgraduate 56 6%
Other 187 20%
Unknown 182 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 269 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 168 18%
Psychology 98 11%
Sports and Recreations 36 4%
Social Sciences 31 3%
Other 108 12%
Unknown 219 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 439. 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 27 June 2022.
All research outputs
#49,292
of 22,103,655 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#89
of 12,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#398
of 216,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1
of 215 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,103,655 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,182 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 216,660 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 215 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.