↓ Skip to main content

Ultrasonographic Assessment of Fifth Metatarsophalangeal Joint Erosion in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Which Aspect Is Better?

Overview of attention for article published in Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Ultrasonographic Assessment of Fifth Metatarsophalangeal Joint Erosion in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Which Aspect Is Better?
Published in
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, December 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2015.11.024
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In this study, the best ultrasound (US) aspect for detection of fifth metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint erosions, the most frequently eroded joint, in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients is investigated. Forty-eight RA patients (F/M = 35/13, mean age and disease durations 50.3 ± 11.8 and 7.9 ± 6.9 y, respectively) were evaluated by B-mode US for erosion. Images were obtained from the dorsal, lateral and plantar aspect of the fifth MTP joint, in longitudinal and transverse scans. The fifth MTP erosions were detected in 36 of 48 patients (75%) and 67 of 96 feet (69.8%). Of the erosions, 15 (22.4%), 53 (79.1%) and 59 (88.0%) were observed at dorsal, lateral and plantar aspects, respectively. Despite not being statistically different, the detection rate of fifth MTP erosions was numerically higher in the plantar aspect than both the lateral and dorsal aspects. In conclusion, the fifth MTP erosions in RA patients are more commonly detected in the plantar aspect US than in dorsal and lateral assessments.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 12 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 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Librarian 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Lecturer 1 8%
Other 3 25%
Unknown 2 17%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 67%
Computer Science 1 8%
Neuroscience 1 8%
Unknown 2 17%
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 01 January 2016.
All research outputs
#16,722,190
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
#1,958
of 2,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,829
of 399,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
#9
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,570 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 399,590 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.