↓ Skip to main content

Infrared thermography is useful for ruling out fractures in paediatric emergencies

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Pediatrics, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Infrared thermography is useful for ruling out fractures in paediatric emergencies
Published in
European Journal of Pediatrics, September 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00431-014-2425-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Enrique Sanchis-Sánchez, Rosario Salvador-Palmer, Pilar Codoñer-Franch, José Martín, Carlos Vergara-Hernández, José Blasco, Esther Ballester, Enrique Sanchis, Rolando González-Peña, Rosa Cibrián

Abstract

Musculoskeletal injuries are a leading cause of paediatric injuries and emergency department visits in Western countries. Diagnosis usually involves radiography, but this exposes children without fractures to unnecessary ionising radiation. We explored whether infrared thermography could provide a viable alternative in trauma cases. We compared radiography and thermal images of 133 children who had been diagnosed with a trauma injury in the emergency unit of a Spanish hospital. As well as the thermal variables in the literature, we introduced a new quantifier variable, the size of the lesion. Decision tree models were built to assess the technique's accuracy in diagnosing whether a bone had been fractured or not. Infrared thermography had a sensitivity of 0.91, a specificity of 0.88 and a negative predictive value of 0.95. The new lesion size variable introduced appeared to be of main importance to the discriminatory power of the method. Conclusion: The high negative predictive value of infrared thermography suggests that it is a promising method for ruling out fractures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 20%
Student > Bachelor 9 16%
Student > Master 8 15%
Researcher 6 11%
Other 4 7%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 7 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 29%
Engineering 6 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Sports and Recreations 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 13 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 26 March 2015.
All research outputs
#3,923,523
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Pediatrics
#764
of 3,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,449
of 251,975 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Pediatrics
#4
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,687 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 251,975 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 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 91% of its contemporaries.