| Title |
Physician practicing preferences for conventional or homeopathic medicines in elderly subjects with musculoskeletal disorders in the EPI3-MSD cohort
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.2147/clep.s64049 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karine Danno, Clementine Joubert, Gerard Duru, Jean-Marie Vetel |
| Abstract |
Musculoskeletal pain is common in elderly persons. Analgesic use is high in the elderly and may involve unacceptable risk in individuals with chronic pain. Our aim was to compare the socio-demographic characteristics of elderly subjects with musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) and to assess medication use and clinical evolution of musculoskeletal pain according to physician prescribing preference: homeopathy (Ho) group, conventional medicine (CM) group, or mixed prescription (MX) group. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 States | 4 | 19% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 14% |
| Bahamas | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 19% |
| Scientists | 2 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 11 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 18% |
| Psychology | 3 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 14 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 03 February 2019.
All research outputs
#1,466,816
of 24,580,204 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#63
of 773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,197
of 242,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,580,204 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 242,385 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 93% 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.