| Title |
Is TKA Using Patient‐specific Instruments Comparable to Conventional TKA? A Randomized Controlled Study of One System
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11999-013-3206-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yoon Whan Roh, Tae Woo Kim, Sahnghoon Lee, Sang Cheol Seong, Myung Chul Lee |
| Abstract |
Patient-specific CT-based instrumentation may reduce implant malpositioning and improve alignment in TKA. However, it is not known whether this innovation is an advance that benefits patients. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Sri Lanka | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 111 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 14% |
| Researcher | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 12% |
| Other | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 24 | 21% |
| Unknown | 25 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 58 | 51% |
| Engineering | 11 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 32 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 September 2013.
All research outputs
#16,047,334
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#5,161
of 7,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,402
of 209,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#46
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 209,853 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 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 57% of its contemporaries.