↓ Skip to main content

A reappraisal of the ileo-rectal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Crohn's and Colitis Supplements, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
A reappraisal of the ileo-rectal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis
Published in
Journal of Crohn's and Colitis Supplements, April 2015
DOI 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjv060
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pär Myrelid, Tom Øresland

Abstract

Colectomy is still frequently required in the care of ulcerative colitis. The most common indications are either non-responding colitis in the emergency setting, chronic active disease, steroid-dependent disease or neoplastic change like dysplasia or cancer. The use of the ileal pouch anal anastomosis has internationally been the gold standard substituting the rectum with a pouch. Recently the use of the ileorectal anastomosis has increased in frequency as reconstructive method after subtotal colectomy. Data from centers using ileorectal anastomosis has shown the method to be safe with a function and risk of failure comparable with the ileal pouch anal anastomosis. The methods have different advantages as well as disadvantages depending on a number of patient factors and were in life the patient is at time of reconstruction. The ileorectal anastomosis could, together with the Kock continent ileostomy, in selected cases be a complement to the ileal pouch anal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis and should be discussed with the patient prior to the decision of reconstructive method.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 12%
Other 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 22 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Psychology 3 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 29 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 07 February 2019.
All research outputs
#5,308,946
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Crohn's and Colitis Supplements
#673
of 2,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,637
of 279,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Crohn's and Colitis Supplements
#5
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 2,103 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 279,194 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.