↓ Skip to main content

Ultrasound evaluation of inguinoscrotal pain: an imaging-based review for the ultrasonographer

Overview of attention for article published in Radiologia Brasileira, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Ultrasound evaluation of inguinoscrotal pain: an imaging-based review for the ultrasonographer
Published in
Radiologia Brasileira, May 2018
DOI 10.1590/0100-3984.2016.0175
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eduardo Kaiser Ururahy Nunes Fonseca, Milena Rocha Peixoto, Francisco de Assis Cavalcante, Antonio Rahal, Miguel José Francisco, Marcelo Buarque de Gusmão Funari

Abstract

Emergencies involving the inguinal region and scrotum are common and can be caused by a plethora of different causes. In most cases, such conditions have nonspecific symptoms and are quite painful. Some inguinoscrotal conditions have high complication rates. Early and accurate diagnosis is therefore imperative. Ultrasound is the method of choice for the initial evaluation of this vast range of conditions, because it is a rapid, ionizing radiation-free, low-cost method. Despite the practicality and accuracy of the method, which make it ideal for use in emergency care, the examiner should be experienced and should be familiarized with the ultrasound findings of the most common inguinoscrotal diseases. On the basis of that knowledge, the examiner should also be able to make an accurate, direct, precise report, helping the emergency room physician make decisions regarding the proper (clinical or surgical) management of each case. Here, we review most of the inguinoscrotal conditions, focusing on the imaging findings and discussing the critical points for the appropriate characterization of each condition.

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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 15%
Student > Postgraduate 2 15%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Unknown 8 62%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 2 15%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 8%
Computer Science 1 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 8%
Unknown 8 62%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 July 2018.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Radiologia Brasileira
#245
of 394 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,499
of 344,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiologia Brasileira
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 394 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 344,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.