| Title |
Linking self-determined functional problems of patients with neck pain to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s36165 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nada Andelic, Jan Borre Johansen, Erik Bautz-Holter, Anne Marit Mengshoel, Eva Bakke, Cecilie Roe |
| Abstract |
To describe commonly reported self-determined functional problems in patients with neck pain and to evaluate their fit to the components of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 4 | 67% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 62 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 14% |
| Researcher | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 15 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 27% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 16 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 22 January 2013.
All research outputs
#6,870,000
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#450
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,534
of 190,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#5
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 190,982 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.