↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Is There a Patient Profile That Characterizes a Patient With Adult Spinal Deformity as a Candidate for Minimally Invasive Surgery?
Published in
Global Spine Journal, July 2017
DOI 10.1177/2192568217716151
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Retrospective review. The goal of this study was to evaluate the baseline characteristics of patients chosen to undergo traditional open versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for adult spinal deformity (ASD). A multicenter review of 2 databases including ASD patients treated with surgery. Inclusion criteria were age >45 years, Cobb angle minimum of 20°, and minimum 2-year follow-up. Preoperative radiographic parameters and disability outcome measures were reviewed. A total of 350 patients were identified: 173 OPEN patients and 177 MIS. OPEN patients were significantly younger than MIS patients (61.5 years vs 63.74 years, P = .013). The OPEN group had significantly more females (87% vs 76%, P = .006), but both groups had similar body mass index. Preoperative lumbar Cobb was significantly higher for the OPEN group (34.2°) than for the MIS group (26.0°, P < .001). The mean preoperative Oswestry Disability Index was significantly higher in the MIS group (44.8 in OPEN patients and 49.8 in MIS patients, P < .011). The preoperative Numerical Rating Scale value for back pain was 7.2 in the OPEN group and 6.8 in the MIS group preoperatively, P = .100. Patients chosen for MIS for ASD are slightly older and have smaller coronal deformities than those chosen for open techniques, but they did not have a substantially lesser degree of sagittal malalignment. MIS surgery was most frequently utilized for patients with an sagittal vertical axis under 6 cm and a baseline pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis mismatch under 30°.

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 29 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 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 28%
Other 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 7%
Librarian 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 12 41%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 38%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 48%
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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#20,406,694
of 29,359,454 outputs
Outputs from Global Spine Journal
#686
of 1,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,719
of 335,699 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Global Spine Journal
#36
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,359,454 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,294 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 335,699 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.