J
John Attia
Researcher at University of Newcastle
Publications - 796
Citations - 39731
John Attia is an academic researcher from University of Newcastle. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Medicine. The author has an hindex of 91, co-authored 727 publications receiving 32950 citations. Previous affiliations of John Attia include John Hunter Hospital & McMaster University.
Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Daily step count and the need for hospital care in subsequent years in a community-based sample of older Australians.
TL;DR: To determine the extent to which physical activity reduces the number of hospital bed‐days for Australians over 55, using an objective measure of activity.
Journal ArticleDOI
The Interplay of Static and Dynamic Postural Factors in Neck Pain
TL;DR: Comparison of published methods of measuring cervical posture and correlations of postural measures revealed trends between posture and demographic and muscle performance measures, with systematic reversal of correlations between sexes.
Journal ArticleDOI
AO type-C distal radius fractures: the influence of computed tomography on surgeon's decision-making.
TL;DR: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of CT scanning compared with plain X‐rays on the choice of intervention in complex distal radius fractures.
Journal ArticleDOI
Measuring research impact in medical research institutes: a qualitative study of the attitudes and opinions of Australian medical research institutes towards research impact assessment frameworks.
Simon Deeming,Penny Reeves,Shanthi Ramanathan,John Attia,John Attia,Michael Nilsson,Michael Nilsson,Andrew Searles +7 more
TL;DR: The study found that the issues raised regarding research impact assessment are less about methods and metrics, and more about the research activities that the measurement of research translation and impact may or may not incentivise.
Journal ArticleDOI
Cautionary tales in the interpretation of observational studies of effects of clinical interventions.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors proposed criteria by which users of the literature might make such determinations and when the study is sufficiently rigorous to be considered reasonably trustworthy, in situations where RCTs are of limited value or very difficult to perform.