↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Patellofemoral pain in athletes

Overview of attention for article published in Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
19 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
413 Mendeley
Title
Patellofemoral pain in athletes
Published in
Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, June 2017
DOI 10.2147/oajsm.s133406
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wolf Petersen, Ingo Rembitzki, Christian Liebau

Abstract

Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is a frequent cause of anterior knee pain in athletes, which affects patients with and without structural patellofemoral joint (PFJ) damage. Most younger patients do not have any structural changes to the PFJ, such as an increased Q angle and a cartilage damage. This clinical entity is known as patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS). Older patients usually present with signs of patellofemoral osteoarthritis (PFOA). A key factor in PFPS development is dynamic valgus of the lower extremity, which leads to lateral patellar maltracking. Causes of dynamic valgus include weak hip muscles and rearfoot eversion with pes pronatus valgus. These factors can also be observed in patients with PFOA. The available evidence suggests that patients with PFP are best managed with a tailored, multimodal, nonoperative treatment program that includes short-term pain relief with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), passive correction of patellar maltracking with medially directed tape or braces, correction of the dynamic valgus with exercise programs that target the muscles of the lower extremity, hip, and trunk, and the use of foot orthoses in patients with additional foot abnormalities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 413 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 413 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 89 22%
Student > Master 62 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 5%
Other 20 5%
Other 57 14%
Unknown 142 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 102 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 76 18%
Sports and Recreations 52 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 1%
Engineering 6 1%
Other 17 4%
Unknown 154 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 25 February 2022.
All research outputs
#2,515,483
of 25,738,558 outputs
Outputs from Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine
#58
of 260 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,436
of 331,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,738,558 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 260 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 331,499 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.