↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Pain sensitivity and torque used during measurement predicts change in range of motion at the knee

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
twitter
26 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
Pain sensitivity and torque used during measurement predicts change in range of motion at the knee
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, November 2017
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s150775
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark D Bishop, Steven Z George

Abstract

To determine the extent to which changes in knee range of motion (ROM) after a stretching program are related to sensory factors at the time of testing and the amount of force used during the measurement of ROM, rather than changes in soft-tissue properties. Randomized, single-blind design. Participants were randomly assigned to a control or stretching group. Research laboratory. Forty-four healthy volunteers (22.8±2.8 years of age; 23 men). The stretching group undertook static stretching twice a day for 8 weeks. The control group continued with routine activity, but was discouraged from starting a flexibility program. ROM and tissue extensibility was assessed using a Biodex3 dynamometer, and ratings of thermal pain were collected at baseline and at 4 and 8 weeks by an examiner blinded to group assignment. Multilevel modeling was used to examine predictors of ROM across time. The stretching group showed a 6% increase, and the control group had a 2% increase, in ROM over the 8-week program. However, when fixed and random effects were tested in a complete model, the group assignment was not significant. End-point torque during ROM testing (p=0.021) and the ratings in response to thermal testing (p<0.001) were significant, however. ROM measured in a testing session was not predicted by assignment to a stretching program. Rather, ROM was predicted by the ratings of thermal stimuli and the peak torque used to apply the stretch.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 17%
Other 5 11%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 4%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 15 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 15%
Sports and Recreations 5 11%
Unspecified 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 17 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 68. 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 19 November 2022.
All research outputs
#642,918
of 25,708,267 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#85
of 2,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,525
of 341,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#6
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,708,267 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 341,776 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 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.