| Title |
The Quality of Reports on Cervical Arterial Dissection following Cervical Spinal Manipulation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0059170 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shari Wynd, Michael Westaway, Sunita Vohra, Greg Kawchuk |
| Abstract |
Cervical artery dissection (CAD) and stroke are serious harms that are sometimes associated with cervical spinal manipulation therapy (cSMT). Because of the relative rarity of these adverse events, studying them prospectively is challenging. As a result, systematic review of reports describing these events offers an important opportunity to better understand the relation between adverse events and cSMT. Of note, the quality of the case report literature in this area has not yet been assessed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 33% |
| France | 2 | 11% |
| Australia | 1 | 6% |
| Spain | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Portugal | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 88 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 20% |
| Other | 18 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 12% |
| Researcher | 7 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 24 | 26% |
| Unknown | 8 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 48 | 51% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 12 | 13% |