↓ Skip to main content

Patterns of recurrence of intussusception in children: a 17-year review

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Radiology, December 1998
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
123 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Patterns of recurrence of intussusception in children: a 17-year review
Published in
Pediatric Radiology, December 1998
DOI 10.1007/s002470050497
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. Daneman, Douglas J. Alton, Edrise Lobo, Jane Gravett, Peter Kim, Sigmund H. Ein

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 1 5%
Unknown 21 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 23%
Researcher 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Lecturer 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 8 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 59%
Unknown 9 41%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 June 2012.
All research outputs
#7,535,755
of 22,992,311 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Radiology
#651
of 2,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,926
of 100,219 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Radiology
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,992,311 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 2,093 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 100,219 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them