↓ Skip to main content

Patellar ligament‐bone autograft for reconstruction of a distal patellar ligament defect in a dog

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Small Animal Practice, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
77 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.
Article details
Title
Patellar ligament‐bone autograft for reconstruction of a distal patellar ligament defect in a dog
Published in
Journal of Small Animal Practice, March 2013
DOI 10.1111/jsap.12043
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

A 3 · 5-year-old whippet was presented 4 weeks after sustaining a traumatic injury to the right stifle joint. A penetrating injury had resulted in patellar ligament (PL) rupture. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed a normal appearing proximal half of the PL and absence of normal fibres within the distal half of the ligament. Surgical repair involved reconstruction of the defect using an autogenous graft harvested from the medial third of the ipsilateral PL. This repair was augmented with a pedicle hamstring graft. A transarticular external skeletal fixator was used to protect the repair for 4 weeks. Seven months after surgery, the dog was able to exercise normally without lameness. To the author's knowledge, this is the first veterinary report of PL grafting of a PL defect, and the first report of surgical augmentation using a hamstring graft.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Norway 1 1%
Unknown 76 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 16 21%
Student > Postgraduate 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Master 6 8%
Researcher 6 8%
Other 19 25%
Unknown 14 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 32%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 23 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 15 19%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 April 2013.
All research outputs
#17,502,915
of 27,276,278 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Small Animal Practice
#702
of 1,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,792
of 213,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Small Animal Practice
#7
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,276,278 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,904 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 213,058 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.