↓ Skip to main content

Cholesteatoma Pearls: Practical Points and Update

Overview of attention for article published in Head and Neck Pathology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
20 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
188 Mendeley
Title
Cholesteatoma Pearls: Practical Points and Update
Published in
Head and Neck Pathology, August 2018
DOI 10.1007/s12105-018-0915-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

James T. Castle

Abstract

The European Academy of Otology and Neurotology in collaboration with the Japanese Otological Society (EAONO/JOS) recently produced a joint consensus document outlining the definitions, classification and staging of middle ear cholesteatoma. The goals were to provide terminologies in the description of cholesteatoma, classify cholesteatoma into distinct categories to facilitate the comparison of surgical outcomes and to provide a staging system that reflects the severity, difficulty of complete removal and restoration of normal function. Cholesteatoma is considered a benign, expanding and destructive epithelial lesion of the temporal bone that is the result of a multifactorial process. If undetected and left treated, cholesteatoma may lead to significant complications including hearing loss, temporal bone destruction and cranial invasion. Recent advances in imaging modalities have allowed for high sensitivity and specificity in identifying the presence of cholesteatoma. Despite these advances, deficiencies exist around the world with access to health care facilities meaning cholesteatoma remains a serious and challenging entity to manage whether found within the pediatric or adult population. Proper diagnosis and management of each form of cholesteatoma is achieved by a thorough understanding of the etiology, classification, clinical presentation and histology, thereby facilitating prevention, early detection and appropriate treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 188 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 32 17%
Other 16 9%
Student > Postgraduate 15 8%
Student > Master 10 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 5%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 87 46%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 75 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Arts and Humanities 3 2%
Other 14 7%
Unknown 85 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 26 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,766,713
of 25,362,278 outputs
Outputs from Head and Neck Pathology
#131
of 1,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,972
of 341,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Head and Neck Pathology
#4
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,362,278 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 341,666 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.