You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Decompressive craniectomy for the treatment of malignant infarction of the middle cerebral artery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep07070 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
XiaoCheng Lu, BaoSheng Huang, JinYu Zheng, Yi Tao, Wan Yu, LinJun Tang, RongLan Zhu, Shuai Li, LiXin Li |
| Abstract |
Early decompressive craniectomy (DC) has been shown to reduce mortality in malignant middle cerebral artery (MCA) infarction, whereas efficacy of DC on functional outcome is inconclusive. Here, we performed a meta-analysis to estimate the effects of DC on malignant MCA infarction and investigated whether age of patients and timing of surgery influenced the efficacy. We systematically searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, Web of Science update to June 2014. Finally, A total of 14 studies involved 747 patients were included, of which 8 were RCTs (341 patients). The results demonstrated that early DC (within 48 h after stroke onset) decreased mortality (OR = 0.14, 95%CI = 0.08, 0.25, p<0.0001) and number of patients with poor functional outcome (modified Rankin scale (mRS)>3) (OR = 0.38, 95%CI = 0.20, 0.73, p = 0.004) for 12 months follow-up. In the subgroup analysis stratified by age, early DC improved outcome both in younger and older patients. However, later DC (after 48h after stroke onset) might not have a benefit effect on lowering mortality or improving outcome in patients with malignant infarction. Together, this study suggested that decompressive surgery undertaken within 48 h reduced mortality and increased the number of patients with a favourable outcome in patients with malignant MCA infarction. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 Kingdom | 3 | 60% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 60 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 12 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 10 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 46% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 17 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 05 January 2016.
All research outputs
#7,137,226
of 22,770,070 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#48,093
of 122,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,859
of 360,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#282
of 812 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,770,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 122,870 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 360,537 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 812 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.