| Title |
Effectiveness and safety of endoscopic versus open carpal tunnel decompression
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00402-013-1898-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Long Chen, Xin Duan, Xiao Huang, Jingtong Lv, Kun Peng, Zhou Xiang |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) and open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) using a meta-analysis of data from randomized controlled trials. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 68 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 23% |
| Unknown | 21 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 8% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 23 | 32% |
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 28 October 2014.
All research outputs
#19,221,261
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery
#952
of 1,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,199
of 309,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery
#17
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 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 1,215 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 309,792 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 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.