| Title |
Physiotherapy interventions for shoulder pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd004258 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sally Green, Rachelle Buchbinder, Sarah E Hetrick |
| Abstract |
The prevalence of shoulder disorders has been reported to range from seven to 36% of the population (Lundberg 1969) accounting for 1.2% of all General Practitioner encounters in Australia (Bridges Webb 1992). Substantial disability and significant morbidity can result from shoulder disorders. While many treatments have been employed in the treatment of shoulder disorders, few have been proven in randomised controlled trials. Physiotherapy is often the first line of management for shoulder pain and to date its efficacy has not been established. This review is one in a series of reviews of varying interventions for shoulder disorders, updated from an earlier Cochrane review of all interventions for shoulder disorder. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 30% |
| Chile | 2 | 20% |
| Canada | 1 | 10% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 10% |
| India | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 694 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | <1% |
| Unknown | 680 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 125 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 111 | 16% |
| Researcher | 57 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 39 | 6% |
| Other | 38 | 5% |
| Other | 127 | 18% |
| Unknown | 197 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 220 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 137 | 20% |
| Sports and Recreations | 32 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 10 | 1% |
| Other | 56 | 8% |
| Unknown | 223 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 01 September 2023.
All research outputs
#1,937,478
of 25,658,541 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,139
of 13,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,215
of 62,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,658,541 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 13,150 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 62,222 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.