| Title |
European Society of Paediatric Radiology abdominal imaging task force recommendations in paediatric uroradiology, part IX: Imaging in anorectal and cloacal malformation, imaging in childhood ovarian torsion, and efforts in standardising paediatric uroradiology terminology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pediatric Radiology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00247-017-3837-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael Riccabona, Maria-Luisa Lobo, Lil-Sofie Ording-Muller, A. Thomas Augdal, E. Fred Avni, Johan Blickman, Constanza Bruno, Beatrice Damasio, Kassa Darge, Akaterina Ntoulia, Frederica Papadopoulou, Pierre-Hugues Vivier |
| Abstract |
At the occasion of the European Society of Paediatric Radiology (ESPR) annual meeting 2015 in Graz, Austria, the newly termed ESPR abdominal (gastrointestinal and genitourinary) imaging task force set out to complete the suggestions for paediatric urogenital imaging and procedural recommendations. Some of the last missing topics were addressed and proposals on imaging of children with anorectal and cloacal malformations and suspected ovarian torsion were issued after intense discussions and a consensus finding process that considered all evidence. Additionally, the terminology was adapted to fit new developments introducing the term pelvicalyceal dilatation/distension (PCD) instead of the sometimes misunderstood hydronephrosis. The present state of paediatric urogenital radiology was discussed in a dedicated minisymposium, including an attempt to adapt terminology to create a standardised glossary. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 13% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 14 | 23% |
| Unknown | 17 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 49% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 20 | 33% |
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 31 August 2017.
All research outputs
#18,569,430
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Radiology
#1,553
of 2,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,237
of 315,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Radiology
#42
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 315,948 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.