↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Surgical versus non-surgical interventions in people with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2015
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 (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
257 Mendeley
Title
Surgical versus non-surgical interventions in people with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010663.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Josette Bettany-Saltikov, Hans-Rudolf Weiss, Nachiappan Chockalingam, Razvan Taranu, Shreya Srinivas, Julie Hogg, Victoria Whittaker, Raman V Kalyan, Tracey Arnell

Abstract

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a three-dimensional deformity of the spine. While AIS can progress during growth and cause a surface deformity, it is usually not symptomatic. However, if the final spinal curvature surpasses a certain critical threshold, the risk of health problems and curve progression is increased. Interventions for the prevention of AIS progression include scoliosis-specific exercises, bracing, and surgery. The main aims of all types of interventions are to correct the deformity and prevent further deterioration of the curve and to restore trunk asymmetry and balance, while minimising morbidity and pain, allowing return to full function. Surgery is normally recommended for curvatures exceeding 40 to 50 degrees to stop curvature progression with a view to achieving better truncal balance and cosmesis. Short-term results of the surgical treatment of people with AIS demonstrate the ability of surgery to improve various outcome measures. However there is a clear paucity of information on long-term follow-up of surgical treatment of people with AIS. To examine the impact of surgical versus non-surgical interventions in people with AIS who have severe curves of over 45 degrees, with a focus on trunk balance, progression of scoliosis, cosmetic issues, quality of life, disability, psychological issues, back pain, and adverse effects, at both the short term (a few months) and the long term (over 20 years). We searched the Cochrane Back Review Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, four other databases, and three trials registers up to August 2014 with no language limitations. We also checked the reference lists of relevant articles and conducted an extensive handsearch of the grey literature. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective controlled trials comparing spinal fusion surgery with non-surgical interventions in people with AIS with a Cobb angle greater than 45 degrees. We were interested in all types of instrumented surgical interventions with fusion that aimed to provide curve correction and spine stabilisation. We found no RCTs or prospective controlled trials that met our inclusion criteria. We did not identify any evidence comparing surgical to non-surgical interventions for AIS with severe curves of over 45 degrees. We cannot draw any conclusions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 257 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 254 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 15%
Student > Bachelor 37 14%
Researcher 32 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 9%
Other 49 19%
Unknown 45 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 85 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 37 14%
Psychology 24 9%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Engineering 7 3%
Other 36 14%
Unknown 59 23%

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 29 April 2020.
All research outputs
#4,350,279
of 17,585,248 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,687
of 11,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,994
of 236,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#150
of 230 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,585,248 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 11,717 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.2. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 236,651 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.