Title |
What Is the Outcome of Allograft and Intramedullary Free Fibula (Capanna Technique) in Pediatric and Adolescent Patients With Bone Tumors?
|
---|---|
Published in |
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, March 2016
|
DOI | 10.1007/s11999-015-4204-2 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Matthew T Houdek, Eric R Wagner, Anthony A Stans, Alexander Y Shin, Allen T Bishop, Franklin H Sim, Steven L Moran |
Abstract |
After bone tumor resection, reconstruction for limb salvage surgery can be challenging because of the resultant large segmental bony defects. Structural allografts have been used to fill these voids; however, this technique is associated with high complication rates. To circumvent the complications associated with this procedure, massive bony allografts have been supplemented with an intramedullary vascularized free fibula. However, few studies have examined the outcomes using this technique in the pediatric and adolescent populations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Spain | 3 | 30% |
Ecuador | 2 | 20% |
United States | 2 | 20% |
China | 1 | 10% |
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 10% |
Unknown | 1 | 10% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 6 | 60% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 30% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 80 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 12 | 15% |
Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 13% |
Other | 8 | 10% |
Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
Other | 18 | 23% |
Unknown | 17 | 21% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 48 | 60% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
Linguistics | 1 | 1% |
Mathematics | 1 | 1% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
Other | 4 | 5% |
Unknown | 22 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 02 April 2018.
All research outputs
#4,900,691
of 25,635,728 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#1,288
of 7,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,693
of 313,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#30
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,635,728 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,322 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 313,176 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 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 70% of its contemporaries.