| Title |
A review of the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system in China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00192-015-2830-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yi-ting Wang, Jun-ying Jiang, Jin-song Han |
| Abstract |
Unified staging systems for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) have been established. We examined the application of the POP quantification (POP-Q) system in China by examining its use in scientific journal articles. Relevant articles were identified by searching the Sinomed database using the terms: uterus prolapse, cystocele, proctocele, prolapse, and pelvic floor; limited to Chinese core journals in obstetrics and gynecology, from January 2004 to December 2014. We analyzed systems for grading POP severity and the adoption of POP-Q in different article categories and hospitals of different levels. For the last decade, with two 5-year groups (2005-2009; 2010-2014), the χ(2) test was used to evaluate inter-group differences. In a total of 429 articles, 331 included a staging system, 70.7% of which used POP-Q. The POP-Q system first appeared in 2004 in China, was reported in 50% of articles in 2007, and its highest use occurred in 2012 (89.5%). In 234 POP-Q system-utilizing reports, operative treatment and basic research accounted for 73.1% and 14.0% respectively. POP-Q usage increased from 2005-2009 to 2010-2014 in surgery-related articles (54.2% vs 85.2%; P = 0.000). The proportion of reports using POP-Q in level I, II, and III hospitals was 20.0%, 35.4%, and 77.8% respectively. The POP-Q system, first used in 2004 in China, is now the most commonly used grading system, with surgery reports and level III hospitals accounting for the largest proportion of POP-Q applications. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 19% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 14% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Librarian | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 67% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 04 June 2020.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#888
of 2,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,064
of 279,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#18
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 279,891 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 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.