↓ Skip to main content

Paediatric surgery: non‐operative advances

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Paediatrics & Child Health, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
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.
Title
Paediatric surgery: non‐operative advances
Published in
Journal of Paediatrics & Child Health, December 2013
DOI 10.1111/jpc.12461
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew JA Holland, Craig A McBride

Abstract

Paediatric surgeons remain paediatric clinicians who have the unique skill set to treat children with surgical problems that may require operative intervention. Many of the advances in paediatric surgical care have occurred outside the operating theatre and have involved significant input from medical, nursing and allied health colleagues. The establishment of neonatal intensive care units, especially those focusing on the care of surgical infants, has greatly enhanced the survival rates and long-term outcomes of those infants with major congenital anomalies requiring surgical repair. Educational initiatives such as the advanced trauma life support and emergency management of severe burns courses have facilitated improved understanding and clinical care. Paediatric surgeons have led with the non-operative management of solid organ injury following blunt abdominal trauma. Nano-crystalline burn wound dressings have enabled a reduced frequency of painful dressing changes in addition to effective antimicrobial efficacy and enhanced burn wound healing. Burns care has evolved so that many children may now be treated almost exclusively in an ambulatory care setting or as day case-only patients, with novel technologies allowing accurate prediction of burn would outcome and planning of elective operative intervention to achieve burn wound closure.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Nigeria 1 2%
Unknown 62 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Researcher 4 6%
Other 15 24%
Unknown 18 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Engineering 2 3%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 22 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 28 May 2015.
All research outputs
#14,657,623
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Paediatrics & Child Health
#1,877
of 3,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,709
of 321,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Paediatrics & Child Health
#12
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,371 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 321,281 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 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 55% of its contemporaries.