| Title |
Knee instruments and rating scales designed to measure outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10195-011-0177-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
E. Carlos Rodriguez-Merchan |
| Abstract |
In this article, the knee instruments and rating scales that are designed to measure outcomes are revised. Although the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form can be used as a general knee measure, no instrument is currently universally applicable across the spectrum of knee disorders and patient groups. Clinicians and researchers looking to use a patient-based score for measurement of outcomes must consider the specific patient population in which it has been evaluated. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index is recommended for the evaluation of treatment effect in persons with osteoarthritis (OA). This is a generic health status questionnaire that contains 36 items, is widely used, and easy to complete. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) questionnaire evaluates the functional status and quality of life (QoL) of patients with any type of knee injury who are at increased risk of developing OA; i.e., patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, meniscus injury, or chondral injury. So far, the KOOS questionnaire has been validated for several orthopedic procedures such as total knee arthroplasty, ACL reconstruction, and meniscectomy. The utilization of QoL questionnaires is crucial to the adequate assessment of a number of orthopedic procedures of the knee. The questionnaires are generally well accepted by the patients and open up new perspectives in the analysis of prognostic factors for optimal QoL of patients undergoing knee surgery. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 192 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 29 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 23 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 11% |
| Researcher | 18 | 9% |
| Other | 40 | 21% |
| Unknown | 38 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 96 | 49% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 11% |
| Sports and Recreations | 11 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 4% |
| Engineering | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 7% |
| Unknown | 40 | 21% |
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 17 August 2012.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
#163
of 224 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,265
of 252,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 224 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 252,191 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.