| Title |
SDH and EDH in children up to 18 years of age—a clinical collective in the view of forensic considerations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Legal Medicine, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00414-018-1889-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wiebke Gekat, Svenja Binder, Christian Wetzel, Markus A. Rothschild, Sibylle Banaschak |
| Abstract |
Providing concise proof of child abuse relies heavily on clinical findings, such as certain patterns of injury or otherwise not plausibly explainable trauma. Subdural hemorrhaging has been identified as a common occurrence in abused children whereas epidural hemorrhaging is related to accidents. In order to explore this correlation, we retrospectively analyzed clinical data of children under 19 years of age diagnosed with either injury. Reviewing 56 cases of epidural and 38 cases of subdural bleeding, it was shown that subdural bleeding is more common in young children and extremely often a result of suspected abuse in children under 2 years of age. Epidural hemorrhaging however never was found in the context of suspected abuse, was unrelated to other injuries typical for abuse, and did not see a statistically significant increase in any age group. In conformity with currently theorized mechanisms of injury for both types of bleeding, we found that subdural hemorrhaging in young children is closely associated with abuse whereas epidural bleeding is not. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 9 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 52% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 July 2018.
All research outputs
#13,267,809
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#689
of 2,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,200
of 327,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#8
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,091 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 327,720 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.