| Title |
Imaging results in a consecutive series of 530 new patients in the Birmingham Headache Service
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neurology, March 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00415-010-5506-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
C. E. Clarke, J. Edwards, D. J. Nicholl, A. Sivaguru |
| Abstract |
Guidelines recommend imaging only headache patients with sinister features in the history or on examination. We prospectively collected data on imaging newly presenting patients to a UK headache service. CT and MRI results were classified as normal or showing an insignificant or significant abnormality. Over 5 years, 3,655 new patients (69% female; mean age 42.0 years) with headache disorders were seen. Five hundred thirty (14.5%) underwent imaging with large differences in the proportion referred by each consultant. There were more insignificant abnormalities on MRI (46%) than CT (28%). There were 11 significantly abnormal results (2.1% of those imaged). Significant abnormalities were found in patients diagnosed with migraine in 1.2% and in 0.9% of those with tension-type headache. Significant abnormalities in those suspected to have an intracranial abnormality occurred in 5.5%. This supports the practice of selecting patients with suspicious findings for imaging, rather than imaging all patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 | 6 | 86% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 19% |
| Researcher | 8 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 13 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 37% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 17 | 40% |
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 22 February 2017.
All research outputs
#5,174,602
of 25,199,243 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#1,361
of 4,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,144
of 99,699 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#5
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,199,243 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 4,941 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 99,699 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.