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 |
Interventions for iatrogenic inferior alveolar and lingual nerve injury
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd005293.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paul Coulthard, Evgeny Kushnerev, Julian M Yates, Tanya Walsh, Neil Patel, Edmund Bailey, Tara F Renton |
| Abstract |
Iatrogenic injury of the inferior alveolar or lingual nerve or both is a known complication of oral and maxillofacial surgery procedures. Injury to these two branches of the mandibular division of the trigeminal nerve may result in altered sensation associated with the ipsilateral lower lip or tongue or both and may include anaesthesia, paraesthesia, dysaesthesia, hyperalgesia, allodynia, hypoaesthesia and hyperaesthesia. Injury to the lingual nerve may also affect taste perception on the affected side of the tongue. The vast majority (approximately 90%) of these injuries are temporary in nature and resolve within eight weeks. However, if the injury persists beyond six months it is deemed to be permanent. Surgical, medical and psychological techniques have been used as a treatment for such injuries, though at present there is no consensus on the preferred intervention, or the timing of the intervention. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 | 7 | 28% |
| United States | 4 | 16% |
| Chile | 2 | 8% |
| Spain | 2 | 8% |
| Canada | 2 | 8% |
| Côte d'Ivoire | 1 | 4% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 4% |
| Brazil | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 5 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 24% |
| Scientists | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 335 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 334 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 59 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 25 | 7% |
| Researcher | 22 | 7% |
| Other | 63 | 19% |
| Unknown | 102 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 157 | 47% |
| Psychology | 14 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 1% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 1% |
| Other | 25 | 7% |
| Unknown | 117 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 11 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,361,293
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,870
of 13,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,332
of 225,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#60
of 222 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 225,045 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 222 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.