| Title |
Update on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Spontaneous Intracranial Hypotension
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Pain and Headache Reports, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11916-017-0639-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter G. Kranz, Michael D. Malinzak, Timothy J. Amrhein, Linda Gray |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study is to provide an update on recent developments in the understanding, diagnosis, and treatment of spontaneous intracranial hypotension (SIH). SIH is an important cause of headaches caused by spinal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks, with an increasingly broad spectrum of clinical presentations and diagnostic findings. A simple conception of the condition as being defined by the presence of low CSF pressure is no longer sufficient or accurate. A number of etiologies for spinal CSF leaks have been identified, including the recent discovery of CSF-venous fistulas, and these various etiologies may require different diagnostic and therapeutic pathways in order to affect a cure. Familiarity with the spectrum of presentations and causes of SIH is critical to accurate and timely diagnosis and management. Challenges exist in both diagnosis and treatment, and require understanding of the underlying pathogenesis of the condition in order to appropriately select testing and treatment. Prospective studies are needed going forward in order to inform workup and guide treatment decisions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 25% |
| India | 1 | 13% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 87 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 15% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 25 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 43% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 37 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 18 May 2019.
All research outputs
#5,738,318
of 22,997,544 outputs
Outputs from Current Pain and Headache Reports
#255
of 803 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,673
of 316,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Pain and Headache Reports
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,997,544 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 803 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 316,683 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.