| Title |
Is Cervical Disc Arthroplasty Superior to Fusion for Treatment of Symptomatic Cervical Disc Disease? A Meta-Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11999-013-2830-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Si Yin, Xiao Yu, Shuangli Zhou, Zhanhai Yin, Yusheng Qiu |
| Abstract |
As the current standard treatment for symptomatic cervical disc disease, anterior cervical decompression and fusion may result in progressive degeneration or disease of the adjacent segments. Cervical disc arthroplasty was theoretically designed to be an ideal substitute for fusion by preserving motion at the operative level and delaying adjacent level degeneration. However, it remains unclear whether arthroplasty achieves that aim. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 89 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 15% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 20% |
| Unknown | 18 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 43% |
| Engineering | 6 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Unknown | 29 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 12 February 2019.
All research outputs
#7,204,882
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#1,972
of 7,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,813
of 291,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#28
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 291,026 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.