↓ Skip to main content

Management of peripheral facial nerve palsy

Overview of attention for article published in European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, March 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
341 Mendeley
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.
Title
Management of peripheral facial nerve palsy
Published in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, March 2008
DOI 10.1007/s00405-008-0646-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Josef Finsterer

Abstract

Peripheral facial nerve palsy (FNP) may (secondary FNP) or may not have a detectable cause (Bell's palsy). Three quarters of peripheral FNP are primary and one quarter secondary. The most prevalent causes of secondary FNP are systemic viral infections, trauma, surgery, diabetes, local infections, tumor, immunological disorders, or drugs. The diagnosis of FNP relies upon the presence of typical symptoms and signs, blood chemical investigations, cerebro-spinal-fluid-investigations, X-ray of the scull and mastoid, cerebral MRI, or nerve conduction studies. Bell's palsy may be diagnosed after exclusion of all secondary causes, but causes of secondary FNP and Bell's palsy may coexist. Treatment of secondary FNP is based on the therapy of the underlying disorder. Treatment of Bell's palsy is controversial due to the lack of large, randomized, controlled, prospective studies. There are indications that steroids or antiviral agents are beneficial but also studies, which show no beneficial effect. Additional measures include eye protection, physiotherapy, acupuncture, botulinum toxin, or possibly surgery. Prognosis of Bell's palsy is fair with complete recovery in about 80% of the cases, 15% experience some kind of permanent nerve damage and 5% remain with severe sequelae.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 341 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Lebanon 1 <1%
Unknown 333 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 46 13%
Student > Postgraduate 37 11%
Student > Master 34 10%
Other 27 8%
Researcher 25 7%
Other 73 21%
Unknown 99 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 151 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 4%
Engineering 12 4%
Neuroscience 11 3%
Other 25 7%
Unknown 103 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 28 January 2023.
All research outputs
#6,551,672
of 23,213,531 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#341
of 3,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,543
of 81,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#6
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,213,531 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,137 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 81,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 50% of its contemporaries.