| Title |
The CASCADE trial: effectiveness of ceramic versus PEEK cages for anterior cervical discectomy with interbody fusion; protocol of a blinded randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2474-14-244 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mark P Arts, Jasper FC Wolfs, Terry P Corbin |
| Abstract |
Anterior cervical discectomy with interbody fusion cages is considered the standard surgical procedure in patients with cervical disc herniation. However, PEEK or metal cages have some undesirable imaging characteristics, leading to a search for alternative materials not creating artifacts on images; silicon nitride ceramic. Whether patients treated with silicon nitride ceramic cages have similar functional outcome as patients treated with PEEK cages is not known. We present the design of the CASCADE trial on effectiveness of ceramic cages versus PEEK cages in patients with cervical disc herniation and/or osteophytes. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 97 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 15% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 19% |
| Unknown | 22 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 34% |
| Engineering | 9 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Materials Science | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 14% |
| Unknown | 31 | 31% |
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 16 August 2013.
All research outputs
#17,693,152
of 22,716,996 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,882
of 4,031 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,817
of 175,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#61
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,716,996 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,031 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 175,522 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 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.