↓ Skip to main content

High-Energy Traumatic Maxillofacial Injury

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
High-Energy Traumatic Maxillofacial Injury
Published in
Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, July 2015
DOI 10.1097/scs.0000000000001789
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jacob Christensen, Yoh Sawatari, Michael Peleg

Abstract

High-energy blunt or penetrating impact leads to great variability in facial injury patterns. Although the mechanism, pattern, and distribution of forces vary, the resultant damage to hard and soft tissues requires dedicated planning and execution of debridement and reconstructive procedures. This article evaluates the initial management of patients sustaining high-energy facial impact injuries resulting in one or more comminuted or displaced facial fractures, with accompanying severe facial lacerations and/or soft tissue defects and avulsion injuries. Seventy-three patients met the criteria for high-energy traumatic injuries at Jackson Memorial/University of Miami Medical Center between 2003 and 2013 and are included in this article. Thirty-nine patients sustained one or more gunshot wounds to the face, and 34 patients were involved in high-speed motor vehicle collisions; all patients met our criteria for high-energy trauma. The treatment protocol for these injuries involves meticulous surgical exploration and assessment, aggressive debridement, early definitive reduction/fixation, and reconstruction as necessary.

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 43 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 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Student > Master 5 12%
Other 4 9%
Lecturer 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 12 28%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 51%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 15 35%
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 09 September 2015.
All research outputs
#17,236,404
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Craniofacial Surgery
#811
of 4,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,586
of 277,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Craniofacial Surgery
#20
of 138 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,553 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 277,613 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 138 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.