↓ Skip to main content

Consensus Statement

Overview of attention for article published in Ear and hearing (Print), July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Consensus Statement
Published in
Ear and hearing (Print), July 2013
DOI 10.1097/aud.0b013e31829c726b
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Patrick Feeney, Lisa L. Hunter, Joseph Kei, David J. Lilly, Robert H. Margolis, Hideko Heidi Nakajima, Stephen T. Neely, Beth A. Prieve, John J. Rosowski, Chris A. Sanford, Kim S. Schairer, Navid Shahnaz, Stefan Stenfelt, Susan E. Voss

Abstract

The participants in the Eriksholm Workshop on Wideband Absorbance Measures of the Middle Ear developed statements for this consensus article on the final morning of the Workshop. The presentations of the first 2 days of the Workshop motivated the discussion on that day. The article is divided into three general areas: terminology; research needs; and clinical application. The varied terminology in the area was seen as potentially confusing, and there was consensus on adopting an organizational structure that grouped the family of measures into the term wideband acoustic immittance (WAI), and dropped the term transmittance in favor of absorbance. There is clearly still a need to conduct research on WAI measurements. Several areas of research were emphasized, including the establishment of a greater WAI normative database, especially developmental norms, and more data on a variety of disorders; increased research on the temporal aspects of WAI; and methods to ensure the validity of test data. The area of clinical application will require training of clinicians in WAI technology. The clinical implementation of WAI would be facilitated by developing feature detectors for various pathologies that, for example, might combine data across ear-canal pressures or probe frequencies.

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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 40 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 17%
Other 6 14%
Researcher 6 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Physics and Astronomy 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 13 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 07 January 2019.
All research outputs
#17,651,172
of 25,872,466 outputs
Outputs from Ear and hearing (Print)
#1,206
of 2,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,299
of 207,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ear and hearing (Print)
#18
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,872,466 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,010 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 207,693 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.