↓ Skip to main content

A scoping review on active vs. passive range of motion approaches to treat heterotopic ossification at the elbow

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences, June 2024
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A scoping review on active vs. passive range of motion approaches to treat heterotopic ossification at the elbow
Published in
Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences, June 2024
DOI 10.3389/fresc.2024.1327417
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patricia Siegel, Shanna Smith, Emily Stark, Cole Burns, Timothy P. Dionne

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 June 2024.
All research outputs
#21,247,608
of 26,090,071 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences
#472
of 678 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,014
of 154,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences
#10
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,090,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 678 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 154,828 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.