↓ Skip to main content

Pediatric intracranial aneurysms: changes from previous studies

Overview of attention for article published in Child's Nervous System, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
Pediatric intracranial aneurysms: changes from previous studies
Published in
Child's Nervous System, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00381-018-3818-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ruiqi Chen, Si Zhang, Chao You, Rui Guo, Lu Ma

Abstract

To develop a better understanding of pediatric intracranial aneurysms (PIAs). All PIAs treated in our center from January 2012 to April 2017 were retrospectively included. Clinical data, treatment summaries, and follow-up outcomes were retrieved and analyzed. A total of 66 PIAs were found in 64 patients with a mean age of 11.4 ± 5.7 years, 68.8% of whom were male. The most common symptoms were seizure (n = 7, 63.6%) for the 0-5 age group and headache (n = 38, 71.7%) for the 6-18 age group. Fifty-one PIAs (77.3%) were located in the anterior circulation, with the middle cerebral artery (MCA) being the most common site (n = 28, 42.4%). Fifteen patients (23.4%) had PIAs that were pseudoaneurysms, and nine of them (60%) had a combined history of head trauma. Thirty-five patients (54.7%) had distal arterial aneurysms, and 21 of them (60%) presented with seizure. During a mean follow-up time of 1.6 ± 1.2 years, 79.7% of patients (n = 51) had favorable outcomes, 5 patients (7.8%) died, and the remaining 8 patients (12.5%) had unfavorable outcomes with severe neurological deficits. Apart from characteristics consistent with previous studies, several new findings regarding PIAs were reported, including a difference in the most common symptoms in different age groups, the MCA as the predominant location of PIAs, the high ratio of pseudoaneurysms and their head trauma etiology, and the incidence of distal arterial aneurysms and their relationship with the risk of seizures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Student > Master 5 11%
Researcher 5 11%
Other 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 15 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 45%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 19 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 03 May 2018.
All research outputs
#18,606,163
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from Child's Nervous System
#1,448
of 2,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,054
of 326,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child's Nervous System
#45
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,806 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 326,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.