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 |
Rhinoplasty Complications and Reoperations: Systematic Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1055/s-0036-1586489 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paulo Fernando Tormin Borges Crosara, Flávio Barbosa Nunes, Danilo Santana Rodrigues, Ana Rosa Pimentel Figueiredo, Helena Maria Gonçalves Becker, Celso Goncalves Becker, Roberto Eustáquio Santos Guimarães |
| Abstract |
Introduction This article is related to complications of rhinoplasty and its main causes of reoperations. Objectives The objective of this study is to perform a systematic review of literature on complications in rhinoplasty. Data Synthesis The authors conducted a survey of articles related to key terms in the literature by using three important databases within 11 years, between January 2002 and January 2013. We found 1,271 abstracts and selected 49 articles to this review. Conclusion The main results showed that the number of primary open rhinoplasty was 7902 (89%) and 765 closed (11%) and the percentage of reoperations in primary open complete rhinoplasties was 2.73% and closed complete was 1.56%. The statistical analysis revealed a value of p = 0.071. The standardization of terms can improve the quality of scientific publications about rhinoplasty. There is no difference between primary open or closed rhinoplasty techniques in relation to reoperations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 26% |
| Unknown | 11 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 53% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 15 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 November 2023.
All research outputs
#16,344,451
of 24,851,605 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#133
of 692 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,344
of 327,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,851,605 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 692 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 327,788 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.