↓ Skip to main content

Should ondansetron use be a reason to admit children with isolated, nondisplaced, linear skull fractures?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, December 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Should ondansetron use be a reason to admit children with isolated, nondisplaced, linear skull fractures?
Published in
Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, December 2019
DOI 10.3171/2019.9.peds19203
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Isolated, nondisplaced skull fractures (ISFs) are a common result of pediatric head trauma. They rarely require surgical intervention; however, many patients with these injuries are still admitted to the hospital for observation. This retrospective study investigates predictors of vomiting and ondansetron use following pediatric ISFs and the role that these factors play in the need for admission and emergency department (ED) revisits. The authors identified pediatric patients (< 18 years old) with a linear ISF who had presented to the ED of a single tertiary care center between 2008 and 2018. Patients with intracranial hemorrhage, significant fracture displacement, or other traumatic injuries were excluded. Outcomes included vomiting, ondansetron use, admission, and revisit following ED discharge. Both univariable and multivariable analyses were used to determine significant predictors of each outcome (p < 0.05). Overall, 518 patients were included in this study. The median patient age was 9.98 months, and a majority of the patients (59%) were male. The most common fracture locations were parietal (n = 293 [57%]) and occipital (n = 144 [28%]). Among the entire patient cohort, 124 patients (24%) had documented vomiting, and 64 of these patients (52%) received ondansetron. In a multivariable analysis, one of the most significant predictors of vomiting was occipital fracture location (OR 4.05, p < 0.001). In turn, and as expected, both vomiting (OR 14.42, p < 0.001) and occipital fracture location (OR 2.66, p = 0.017) were associated with increased rates of ondansetron use. A total of 229 patients (44%) were admitted to the hospital, with vomiting as the most common indication for admission (n = 59 [26%]). Moreover, 4.1% of the patients had ED revisits following initial discharge, and the most common reason was vomiting (11/21 [52%]). However, in the multivariable analysis, ondansetron use at initial presentation (and not vomiting) was the sole predictor of revisit following initial ED discharge (OR 5.05, p = 0.009). In this study, older patients and those with occipital fractures were more likely to present with vomiting and to be treated with ondansetron. Additionally, ondansetron use at initial presentation was found to be a significant predictor of revisits following ED discharge. Ondansetron could be masking recurrent vomiting in ED patients, and this should be considered when deciding which patients to observe further or discharge.

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 7 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 13 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 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 15%
Other 2 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Unknown 4 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Psychology 1 8%
Sports and Recreations 1 8%
Neuroscience 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 31%
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 25 December 2019.
All research outputs
#11,402,623
of 34,377,743 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics
#893
of 2,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,447
of 524,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics
#20
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,377,743 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 2,049 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 524,586 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 65% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.