↓ Skip to main content

Mobile Cecum in a Young Woman with Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Hypermobility type: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

Overview of attention for article published in Internal Medicine, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
Mobile Cecum in a Young Woman with Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Hypermobility type: A Case Report and Review of the Literature
Published in
Internal Medicine, September 2017
DOI 10.2169/internalmedicine.8758-16
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoshihisa Fukuda, Yusuke Higuchi, Kanae Shinozaki, Yuji Tanigawa, Taro Abe, Nobuyoshi Hanaoka, Sunao Matsubayashi, Tomomi Yamaguchi, Tomoki Kosho, Koji Nakamichi

Abstract

Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, hypermobility type (EDS-HT) is unexpectedly common and is associated with a high rate of gastrointestinal manifestations. We herein report the first documented case of mobile cecum associated with EDS-HT. A 21-year-old woman with repeated right lower abdominal pain was initially diagnosed with EDS-HT. Abdominal examinations performed in the supine position, such as CT and ultrasonography, showed no gross abnormalities. In contrast, oral barium gastrointestinal transit X-ray images obtained with changes in the patient's body position revealed position-dependent cecal volvulus with mobile cecum. She was finally discharged with a dramatic resolution of her symptoms after laparoscopic cecopexy for mobile cecum.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 21%
Researcher 4 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 16%
Student > Master 3 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 2 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Psychology 2 11%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 4 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 02 July 2022.
All research outputs
#8,320,761
of 25,523,622 outputs
Outputs from Internal Medicine
#453
of 2,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,976
of 323,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Internal Medicine
#23
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,523,622 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,950 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 323,754 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.