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 |
Non‐operative versus operative treatment for blunt pancreatic trauma in children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009746.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael V Haugaard, André Wettergren, Jens Georg Hillingsø, Christian Gluud, Luit Penninga |
| Abstract |
Pancreatic trauma in children is a serious condition with high morbidity. Blunt traumatic pancreatic lesions in children can be treated non-operatively or operatively. For less severe, grade I and II, blunt pancreatic trauma a non-operative or conservative approach is usually employed. Currently, the optimal treatment, of whether to perform operative or non-operative treatment of severe, grade III to V, blunt pancreatic injury in children is unclear. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 | 4 | 33% |
| Canada | 2 | 17% |
| Spain | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 118 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 14% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Researcher | 10 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 21 | 18% |
| Unknown | 36 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 9% |
| Psychology | 6 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Unknown | 52 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 November 2016.
All research outputs
#2,573,607
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,148
of 13,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,831
of 331,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#92
of 225 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 90th 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 331,241 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 225 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 59% of its contemporaries.