↓ Skip to main content

Causes of pneumocephalus and when to be concerned about it

Overview of attention for article published in Emergency Radiology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Causes of pneumocephalus and when to be concerned about it
Published in
Emergency Radiology, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10140-018-1595-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alain Cunqueiro, Meir H. Scheinfeld

Abstract

Intracranial gas is commonly detected on neuroimaging. The recognition of this finding can at first blush be unsettling. Being able to localize this gas to a specific compartment: intraarterial, intravenous, intraparenchymal, subdural, epidural, subarachnoid and intraventricular, is the first step in determining the importance of the gas. Determination of the route of entry: through the skull, extension from a paranasal sinus or the mastoid air cells, via the spine, or trans-vascular, is the other important factor in determining potential consequences. Understanding these parameters allows for a confident determination of etiology. More importantly, it generally provides guidance as to what must be done: either to disregard (e.g., subarachnoid gas following lumbar puncture and intravenous gas following IV placement), obtain follow-up (e.g., postoperative gas), or administer emergent treatment (e.g., intraarterial gas and epidural abscess). In this review, we use gas location and route of entry to classify the various causes of pneumocephalus and provide examples of each of these etiologies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Other 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 58%
Computer Science 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Engineering 1 3%
Unknown 11 33%
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 09 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,452,869
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from Emergency Radiology
#173
of 527 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,465
of 333,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emergency Radiology
#4
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 527 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 333,789 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 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 69% of its contemporaries.