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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A Unified Approach to Outcomes Assessment for Distal Radius Fractures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Hand Surgery - American Edition, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jhsa.2016.02.001 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer F. Waljee, Amy Ladd, Joy C. MacDermid, Tamara D. Rozental, Scott W. Wolfe, Distal Radius Outcomes Consortium, Leon S. Benson, Ryan P. Calfee, David G. Dennison, Douglas P. Hanel, Guillaume Herzberg, Robert Hotchkiss, Jesse B. Jupiter, Robert A. Kaufmann, Steve K. Lee, Kagan Ozer, David C. Ring, Mark Ross, Peter J. Stern |
| Abstract |
Distal radius fractures are one of the most common upper extremity injuries. Currently, outcome assessment after treatment of these injuries varies widely with respect to the measures that are used, timing of assessment, and the end points that are considered. A more consistent approach to outcomes assessment would provide a standard by which to assess treatment options and best practices. In this summary, we review the consensus regarding outcomes assessment after distal radius fractures and propose a systematic approach that integrates performance, patient-reported outcomes, pain, complications, and radiographs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 98 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 16% |
| Researcher | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Professor | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 25 | 25% |
| Unknown | 18 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Unknown | 22 | 22% |
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 23 May 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hand Surgery - American Edition
#2,734
of 3,903 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,114
of 313,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hand Surgery - American Edition
#20
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,903 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 313,484 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.