↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Architecture of head and neck soft tissues and associated entheses: An exploration of sexual dimorphism in, and population differences between, New Zealand and Thai individuals
Published in
Journal of Anatomy, March 2023
DOI 10.1111/joa.13853
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Understanding the musculoskeletal anatomy of soft tissues of the head and neck is important for surgical applications, biomechanical modelling and management of injuries, such as whiplash. Additionally, analysing sex and population differences in cervical anatomy can inform how biological sex and population variation may impact these anatomical applications. Although some muscles of the head and neck are well-studied, there is limited architectural information that also analyses sex and population variation, for many small cervical soft tissues (muscles and ligaments) and associated entheses (soft tissue attachment sites). Therefore, the aim of this study was to present architectural data (e.g., proximal and distal attachment sites, muscle physiological cross-sectional area, ligament mass, enthesis area) and analyse sex and population differences in soft tissues and entheses associated with sexually dimorphic landmarks on the cranium (nuchal crest and mastoid process) and clavicle (rhomboid fossa). Through the dissection and three-dimensional analysis of 20 donated cadavers from New Zealand (five males, five females; mean age 83 ± 8 years; range 67-93 years) and Thailand (five males, five females; 69 ± 13 years; range 44-87 years), the following soft tissues and their associated entheses were analysed: upper trapezius, semispinalis capitis and the nuchal ligament (nuchal crest); sternocleidomastoid, splenius capitis and longissimus capitis (mastoid process); the clavicular head of pectoralis major, subclavius, sternohyoid and the costoclavicular (rhomboid) ligament (rhomboid fossa). Findings indicate that although muscle, ligament and enthesis sizes were generally similar to previously published data, muscle size was smaller for six of the eight muscles in this study, with only the upper trapezius and subclavius demonstrating similar values to previous studies. Proximal and distal attachment sites were largely consistent with the current research. However, some individuals (six of 20) had proximal upper trapezius attachments on the cranium, with most attaching solely to the nuchal ligament, contrasting with existing literature, which often describes attachment to the occipital bone. With respect to sexual dimorphism, the Thai sample exhibited more sex differences in muscle size than the New Zealand sample, but for enthesis size (area), both samples had the same amount of statistically significant sex differences (5 of 10). Additionally, some significant population differences were found when comparing muscle and enthesis size data between the New Zealand and Thai samples. Despite these findings, no sex or population differences were found for ligament size (mass) in either group. This paper presents new architectural data for several understudied areas of the head and neck, as well as providing analyses on sex and population differences, two areas that have limited representation in anatomy.

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 18 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 %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 7 39%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 17%
Unspecified 2 11%
Arts and Humanities 1 6%
Environmental Science 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 7 39%
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 08 March 2023.
All research outputs
#14,682,837
of 23,505,064 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Anatomy
#1,531
of 2,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,743
of 339,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Anatomy
#21
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,505,064 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 339,345 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.