↓ Skip to main content

History, epidemiology and regional diversities of urolithiasis

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Nephrology, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
312 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
419 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
History, epidemiology and regional diversities of urolithiasis
Published in
Pediatric Nephrology, January 2010
DOI 10.1007/s00467-008-0960-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle López, Bernd Hoppe

Abstract

Archeological findings give profound evidence that humans have suffered from kidney and bladder stones for centuries. Bladder stones were more prevalent during older ages, but kidney stones became more prevalent during the past 100 years, at least in the more developed countries. Also, treatment options and conservative measures, as well as 'surgical' interventions have also been known for a long time. Our current preventive measures are definitively comparable to those of our predecessors. Stone removal, first lithotomy for bladder stones, followed by transurethral methods, was definitively painful and had severe side effects. Then, as now, the incidence of urolithiasis in a given population was dependent on the geographic area, racial distribution, socio-economic status and dietary habits. Changes in the latter factors during the past decades have affected the incidence and also the site and chemical composition of calculi, with calcium oxalate stones being now the most prevalent. Major differences in frequency of other constituents, particularly uric acid and struvite, reflect eating habits and infection risk factors specific to certain populations. Extensive epidemiological observations have emphasized the importance of nutritional factors in the pathogenesis of urolithiasis, and specific dietary advice is, nowadays, often the most appropriate for prevention and treatment of urolithiasis.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 419 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Pakistan 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 413 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 55 13%
Student > Master 45 11%
Student > Postgraduate 39 9%
Researcher 29 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 7%
Other 82 20%
Unknown 140 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 151 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 16 4%
Other 33 8%
Unknown 156 37%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 February 2024.
All research outputs
#7,164,736
of 25,320,147 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Nephrology
#1,426
of 4,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,101
of 175,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Nephrology
#9
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,320,147 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 4,048 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 175,866 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 24 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 66% of its contemporaries.