↓ Skip to main content

Functional outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty compared with hemiarthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fractures

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
232 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
Functional outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty compared with hemiarthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fractures
Published in
Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, May 2012
DOI 10.1016/j.jse.2012.03.006
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Complex acute proximal humeral fractures may require prosthetic replacement of the proximal humerus. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has been suggested as an alternative to hemiarthroplasty in the management of such fractures. This study compared the functional outcomes of RSA with hemiarthroplasty in patients with acute proximal humeral fractures.

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 232 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 %
Turkey 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Andorra 1 <1%
Unknown 224 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 37 16%
Other 32 14%
Student > Postgraduate 20 9%
Student > Bachelor 17 7%
Student > Master 15 6%
Other 53 23%
Unknown 58 25%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 131 56%
Engineering 10 4%
Unspecified 7 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 7 3%
Unknown 68 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 28 May 2020.
All research outputs
#2,955,684
of 29,283,295 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
#245
of 3,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,060
of 188,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
#3
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,283,295 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,565 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 188,400 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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 92% of its contemporaries.