| Title |
Is Single-stage Revision According to a Strict Protocol Effective in Treatment of Chronic Knee Arthroplasty Infections?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11999-014-3721-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fares Sami Haddad, Mohamed Sukeik, Sulaiman Alazzawi |
| Abstract |
The increasing number of patients experiencing periprosthetic total knee arthroplasty (TKA) infections and the cost of treating them suggest that we seek alternatives to two-stage revision. Single-stage revision is a potential alternative to the standard two-stage procedure because it involves only one surgical procedure, so if it is comparably effective, it would be associated with less patient morbidity and lower cost. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 States | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 146 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 14% |
| Other | 17 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 17 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 32 | 22% |
| Unknown | 36 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 79 | 53% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 1% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Unknown | 49 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 14 June 2019.
All research outputs
#2,490,873
of 25,998,826 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#367
of 7,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,054
of 247,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#5
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,998,826 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,430 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 247,357 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.