| Title |
Surgery versus conservative treatment in patients with type A distal radius fractures, a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2474-15-90 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Monique MJ Walenkamp, J Carel Goslings, Annechien Beumer, Robert Haverlag, Peter A Leenhouts, Egbert JMM Verleisdonk, Ronald SL Liem, Jan Bernard Sintenie, Maarten WGA Bronkhorst, Jasper Winkelhagen, Niels WL Schep |
| Abstract |
Fractures of the distal radius are common and account for an estimated 17% of all fractures diagnosed. Two-thirds of these fractures are displaced and require reduction. Although distal radius fractures, especially extra-articular fractures, are considered to be relatively harmless, inadequate treatment may result in impaired function of the wrist. Initial treatment according to Dutch guidelines consists of closed reduction and plaster immobilisation. If fracture redisplacement occurs, surgical treatment is recommended. Recently, the use of volar locking plates has become more popular. The aim of this study is to compare the functional outcome following surgical reduction and fixation with a volar locking plate with the functional outcome following closed reduction and plaster immobilisation in patients with displaced extra-articular distal radius fractures. |
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 | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 172 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 12% |
| Researcher | 16 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 8% |
| Other | 37 | 21% |
| Unknown | 46 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 90 | 52% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 8% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Unknown | 51 | 29% |
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 21 March 2014.
All research outputs
#15,296,915
of 22,749,166 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,450
of 4,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,808
of 223,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#63
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,749,166 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 4,035 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 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 223,385 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.