↓ Skip to main content

Development of a clinical prediction rule to identify patients with neck pain likely to benefit from cervical traction and exercise

Overview of attention for article published in European Spine Journal, January 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
356 Mendeley
Title
Development of a clinical prediction rule to identify patients with neck pain likely to benefit from cervical traction and exercise
Published in
European Spine Journal, January 2009
DOI 10.1007/s00586-008-0859-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicole H. Raney, Evan J. Petersen, Tracy A. Smith, James E. Cowan, Daniel G. Rendeiro, Gail D. Deyle, John D. Childs

Abstract

The objective of the study was to develop a clinical prediction rule (CPR) to identify patients with neck pain likely to improve with cervical traction. The study design included prospective cohort of patients with neck pain referred to physical therapy. Development of a CPR will assist clinicians in classifying patients with neck pain likely to benefit from cervical traction. Eighty patients with neck pain received a standardized examination and then completed six sessions of intermittent cervical traction and cervical strengthening exercises twice weekly for 3 weeks. Patient outcome was classified at the end of treatment, based on perceived recovery according to the global rating of change. Patients who achieved a change > or =+6 ("A great deal better" or "A very great deal better") were classified as having a successful outcome. Univariate analyses (t tests and chi-square) were conducted on historical and physical examination items to determine potential predictors of successful outcome. Variables with a significance level of P < or = 0.15 were retained as potential prediction variables. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs) were then calculated for all variables with a significant relationship with the reference criterion of successful outcome. Potential predictor variables were entered into a step-wise logistic regression model to determine the most accurate set of clinical examination items for prediction of treatment success. Sixty-eight patients (38 female) were included in data analysis of which 30 had a successful outcome. A CPR with five variables was identified: (1) patient reported peripheralization with lower cervical spine (C4-7) mobility testing; (2) positive shoulder abduction test; (3) age > or =55; (4) positive upper limb tension test A; and (5) positive neck distraction test. Having at least three out of five predictors present resulted in a +LR equal to 4.81 (95% CI = 2.17-11.4), increasing the likelihood of success with cervical traction from 44 to 79.2%. If at least four out of five variables were present, the +LR was equal to 23.1 (2.5-227.9), increasing the post-test probability of having improvement with cervical traction to 94.8%. This preliminary CPR provides the ability to a priori identify patients with neck pain likely to experience a dramatic response with cervical traction and exercise. Before the rule can be implemented in routine clinical practice, future studies are necessary to validate the rule. The CPR developed in this study may improve clinical decision-making by assisting clinicians in identifying patients with neck pain likely to benefit from cervical traction and exercise.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 356 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 10 3%
Germany 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 335 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 72 20%
Other 65 18%
Student > Postgraduate 44 12%
Researcher 36 10%
Student > Master 34 10%
Other 105 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 221 62%
Nursing and Health Professions 64 18%
Unspecified 20 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 4%
Sports and Recreations 11 3%
Other 24 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 March 2014.
All research outputs
#2,006,886
of 5,036,385 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#286
of 1,777 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,748
of 83,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#7
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,036,385 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 59th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,777 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 83,277 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.