↓ Skip to main content

Managing human bites

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Emergencies, Trauma & Shock, January 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#6 of 434)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
16 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
reddit
45 Redditors
bluesky
2 Bluesky users

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Managing human bites
Published in
Journal of Emergencies, Trauma & Shock, January 2009
DOI 10.4103/0974-2700.55331
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Human bites are frequently overlooked in making a diagnosis in the emergency room. They are particularly notorious due to the polymicrobial nature of human saliva inoculated in the wound and the risk they pose for transmission of infectious diseases. Early treatment, appropriate prophylaxis and surgical evaluation are the key to achieving desired treatment outcomes. Through this article, we have tried to summarize the diagnostic features, complications as well as the recommended treatment alternatives for human bites based on the current available evidence.

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 16 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 61 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 %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 60 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 21%
Other 8 13%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Postgraduate 7 11%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 15 25%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 49%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 21 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 80. 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 05 October 2026.
All research outputs
#678,994
of 34,526,284 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Emergencies, Trauma & Shock
#6
of 434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,030
of 250,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Emergencies, Trauma & Shock
#1
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,526,284 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 434 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 250,314 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.