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 |
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PREOPERATIVE ULTRASONOGRAPHY REPORTS WITH INTRAOPERATIVE SURGICAL FINDINGS IN CHOLELITHIASIS
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo), January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1590/0102-6720201600010007 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Flávio Kreimer, Daniel José Dias Cunha, Carolina Cavalcanti Gonçalves Ferreira, Thais Menezes Rodrigues, Lucas Gomes de Morais Fulco, Eduardo Sávio Nascimento Godoy |
| Abstract |
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is widely used for cholelithiasis. Abdominal ultrasonography often precedes this operation and can prove diagnosis, as well as helps in showing possible complications during the perioperative period. Evaluate the description of variables of gallbladder and bile ducts present in reports of preoperative abdominal ultrasonography in cholelithiasis comparing with surgical findings. Were studied 91 patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy with previous abdominal ultrasonography. Variables such as identification and amount of gallstones involved were evaluated, both in preoperative ultrasonography and during surgery to evaluate sensitivity, specificity, concordance and positive and negative predictive values. The reports did not mention diameter of vesicular light (98.9%), organ distension (62.6%), gallstone sizes (58.2%), wall thickness (41.8%) and evaluation of the common bile duct (39.6%). Ultrasound had high values for sensitivity, consistency and positive predictive value for identifying the presence/absence of gallstones: 98.8%, 96.7% and 97.8% respectively. As for the amount of stones, ultrasonography showed agreement in 82.7%, negative predictive value in 89.1% and specificity in 87.7%, with lower values for sensitivity (68.2%) and positive predictive value (65.2%). The ultrasound reports were flawed in standardization. Significant percentage of them did not have variables that could predict perioperative complications and surgical conversion. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 19% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 8% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 46% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 4% |
| Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 35% |
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 28 April 2016.
All research outputs
#23,154,082
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo)
#178
of 292 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#344,494
of 402,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo)
#19
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 292 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 402,072 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.