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 |
Comparison of surgical treatment with direct repair versus conservative treatment in young patients with spondylolysis: a prospective, comparative, clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Spine Journal, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.02.019 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gun Woo Lee, Sun-Mi Lee, Myun-Whan Ahn, Ho-Joong Kim, Jin S. Yeom |
| Abstract |
Although direct repair (DR) with screw fixation at the pars defect is a common surgical treatment for lumbar spondylolysis, it is unknown whether DR leads to better outcomes for young patients with spondylolysis than traditional non-surgical treatment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 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 | 14 | 30% |
| United States | 9 | 20% |
| Australia | 3 | 7% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 4% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 4% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Qatar | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 11 | 24% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 37 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 11% |
| Scientists | 4 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Qatar | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 72 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 16 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 12% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 19% |
| Unknown | 12 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 17% |
| Sports and Recreations | 6 | 8% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 30 August 2017.
All research outputs
#1,048,270
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Spine Journal
#81
of 3,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,632
of 369,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Spine Journal
#3
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 369,481 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 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 97% of its contemporaries.