↓ Skip to main content

Earliest Animal Cranial Surgery: from Cow to Man in the Neolithic

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
50 news outlets
blogs
9 blogs
twitter
53 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
9 Wikipedia pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Earliest Animal Cranial Surgery: from Cow to Man in the Neolithic
Published in
Scientific Reports, April 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41598-018-23914-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fernando Ramirez Rozzi, Alain Froment

Abstract

The earliest cranial surgery (trepanation) has been attested since the Mesolithic period. The meaning of such a practice remains elusive but it is evident that, even in prehistoric times, humans from this period and from the Neolithic period had already achieved a high degree of mastery of surgical techniques practiced on bones. How such mastery was acquired in prehistoric societies remains an open question. The analysis of an almost complete cow cranium found in the Neolithic site of Champ-Durand (France) (3400-3000 BC) presenting a hole in the right frontal bone reveals that this cranium underwent cranial surgery using the same techniques as those used on human crania. If bone surgery on the cow cranium was performed in order to save the animal, Champ-Durant would provide the earliest evidence of veterinary surgical practice. Alternatively, the evidence of surgery on this cranium can also suggest that Neolithic people practiced on domestic animals in order to perfect the technique before applying it to humans.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 17%
Student > Master 4 14%
Researcher 3 10%
Other 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 14%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Environmental Science 2 7%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Other 9 31%
Unknown 7 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 490. 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 April 2023.
All research outputs
#53,866
of 25,503,365 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#784
of 141,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,265
of 341,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#15
of 3,389 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,503,365 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 141,420 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.7. 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 341,180 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,389 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 99% of its contemporaries.