| Title |
PORP vs. TORP: a meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00405-013-2388-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Huiqian Yu, Yingzi He, Yusu Ni, Yunfeng Wang, Na Lu, Huawei Li |
| Abstract |
After the surgical procedure of ossicular chain reconstruction, the effectiveness and/or stability of partial ossicular replacement prosthesis (PORP) or total ossicular replacement prosthesis (TORP) were systematically compared and evaluated using meta-analysis. A total of 40 eligible investigations with 4,311 subjects were included in our study. There was a significant difference in the effectiveness of the reconstruction of the ossicular chain between PORP and TORP; the data showed a combined risk ratio (RR) of 1.28 (95 % CI 1.17-1.41, p < 0.00001), but no notable difference was obtained in staged procedures subgroup and cholesteatoma subgroup, with a combined RR of 1.13 (95 % CI 0.60-2.11, p = 0.70) in staged procedures subgroup and RR of 2.60 (95 % CI 0.20-36.21, p = 0.59 in cholesteatoma subgroup). There was a statistically significant difference in the stability of the prostheses in long-term follow-up, with a combined RR of 0.37 (95 % CI 0.16-0.85, p = 0.02), but no significant difference was observed in the total sample, with a combined RR of 0.64 (95 % CI 0.40-1.03, p = 0.06). Our overall results suggest that the effectiveness of PORP was higher than TORP, except within staged procedures subgroup and cholesteatoma subgroup. In addition, the stability of PORP was significantly superior to TORP in long-term follow-ups, but no significant effect was detected in the general study. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Russia | 1 | 2% |
| Sweden | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 62 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 23% |
| Unknown | 13 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 55% |
| Engineering | 4 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 16 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 March 2013.
All research outputs
#15,267,294
of 22,703,044 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#1,174
of 3,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,197
of 287,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#14
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,703,044 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,039 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 287,486 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.