↓ Skip to main content

Intrauterine device embedded in omentum of postpartum patient with a markedly retroverted uterus: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Case Reports, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#37 of 3,950)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
3 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Intrauterine device embedded in omentum of postpartum patient with a markedly retroverted uterus: a case report
Published in
Journal of Medical Case Reports, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13256-017-1480-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dana A. Neumann, Joseph A. Graversen, Suzanne K. Pugh

Abstract

The intrauterine device is a popular form of long-acting reversible contraception. Although generally safe, one of the most serious complications of intrauterine device use is uterine perforation. Risk factors for perforation include position of the uterus, force exerted during intrauterine device insertion, postpartum period, and breastfeeding. This case is important and needs to be reported because it highlights the need to assess risk factors for uterine perforation. It adds to the medical literature because it examines the relationship between position of the uterus and the location of uterine perforation. This case report is unusual in that it describes the mechanism and specific location of uterine perforation in relation to the position of the uterus. We present a case of an intrauterine device found in the omentum of a 30-year-old white postpartum woman with a significantly retroverted uterus after the intrauterine device threads were not visualized on speculum examination during a 6-week placement check. The intrauterine device was located and removed via laparoscopy without complication. This case report will be of interest to women's health practitioners because it illustrates the importance of identifying patients with risk factors for uterine perforation, examining the relationship between uterine position and location of perforation. This is especially significant because the true incidence of perforation may be higher than the numbers reported in the literature. There is no specific diagnostic code for uterine perforation and it is unlikely that retrospective studies can accurately identify all cases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 22%
Unspecified 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 7 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 22%
Unspecified 2 9%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 12 June 2018.
All research outputs
#698,500
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#37
of 3,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,275
of 327,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#1
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,950 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 327,931 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 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 98% of its contemporaries.