| Title |
Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer: single-center results
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-014-3481-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Simone Guadagni, Ismail Cengeli, Christian Galatioto, Niccolò Furbetta, Vincenzo Lippolis Piero, Giuseppe Zocco, Massimo Seccia |
| Abstract |
Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU), the most common indication for emergency gastric surgery, is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Outcomes might be improved by performing this procedure laparoscopically, but no consensus exists on whether the benefits of laparoscopic repair (LR) of PPU outweigh the disadvantages. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 17% |
| Researcher | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 24% |
| Unknown | 8 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 70% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 8 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 March 2014.
All research outputs
#12,603,274
of 22,747,498 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#2,471
of 6,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,569
of 220,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#111
of 163 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,747,498 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,019 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 220,953 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 163 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.