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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Left-handedness as a risk factor for fractures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Osteoporosis International, October 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00198-003-1450-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Crystal M. Luetters, Jennifer L. Kelsey, Theresa H. M. Keegan, Charles P. Quesenberry, Stephen Sidney |
| Abstract |
Left-handedness has been associated with increased fracture risk in a small number of previous studies. This study reports risks for fractures at the proximal humerus, distal forearm, pelvis, foot, and shaft of the tibia/fibula according to handedness in a case-control study conducted from October 1996 to May 2001 among members of Northern California Kaiser Permanente. Handedness was assessed by questionnaire for 2,841 cases and 2,192 controls, and subjects were categorized as left-handed, right-handed, ambidextrous, or forced to switch from the left to the right hand. Compared to right-handedness, left-handedness was most strongly associated with an increased risk for proximal humerus fractures (adjusted odds ratio (OR)=2.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33 to 3.01) and less definitively with fractures of the distal forearm (adjusted OR=1.28, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.80), foot (adjusted OR=1.17, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.65), and pelvis (adjusted OR=1.40, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.74). Ambidextrous individuals had elevated risks for fractures of the distal forearm (adjusted OR=2.99, 95% CI 1.42 to 6.30), foot (adjusted OR=2.59, 95% CI 1.13 to 5.97), shaft of the tibia/fibula (adjusted OR=3.91, 95% CI 1.01 to 15.17), and proximal humerus (adjusted OR=2.37, 95% CI 0.85 to 6.65) when compared with right-handed individuals. Those individuals forced to use the right hand demonstrated no increased risk for fractures at any site. These results suggest that handedness does influence fracture risk, but the reasons for this increased risk are unclear. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 24% |
| Researcher | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 57% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
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 07 July 2019.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Osteoporosis International
#1,511
of 3,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,830
of 56,494 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Osteoporosis International
#4
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,859 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 56,494 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.