↓ Skip to main content

Clinical interpretation of asymptomatic medial collateral ligament injury observed on magnetic resonance imaging in adolescent baseball players

Overview of attention for article published in Japanese Journal of Radiology, April 2017
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
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Clinical interpretation of asymptomatic medial collateral ligament injury observed on magnetic resonance imaging in adolescent baseball players
Published in
Japanese Journal of Radiology, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11604-017-0636-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kenta Tanaka, Yoshikazu Okamoto, Takeshi Makihara, Kiyoshi Maehara, Tomohiro Yoshizawa, Manabu Minami, Masashi Yamazaki

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of medial collateral ligament (MCL) injury of the elbow was often observed in asymptomatic adolescent baseball players. We aimed to clarify the clinical interpretation of "asymptomatic MCL injury observed on MRI" by comparing MRI, ultrasonography (US), and physical findings. Sixty-four asymptomatic adolescent baseball players (mean 11.2 years) were enrolled. An open-type 0.2T MRI was used. MCL function was evaluated by measuring the opening of the ulnohumeral joint using US. Physical findings included MCL tenderness, the moving valgus test, and the Milking test. The correlation between MRI and US, and MRI and physical findings were analyzed. Thirty-four subjects (53.1%) showed MCL injury by MRI. The mean laterality of the ulnohumeral joint opening showed no significant difference (P = 0.16) between the group with (0.29 ± 1.06 mm) and without (0.08 ± 0.96 mm) MCL injury on MRI. There was no correlation between MRI and physical findings except for a weak correlation between subjects with positive Milking test and MCL injury on MRI (φ coefficient = 0.3, P = 0.02). 'Asymptomatic MCL injury on MRI' had little correlation to ligament dysfunction. It might represent the transition period to MCL thickening called "adaptation."

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 19%
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Other 6 23%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 23%
Psychology 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Sports and Recreations 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 5 19%
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 10 July 2022.
All research outputs
#15,346,908
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from Japanese Journal of Radiology
#143
of 360 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,533
of 309,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Japanese Journal of Radiology
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 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 360 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 309,765 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.