↓ Skip to main content

Simple urethral dilatation, endoscopic urethrotomy, and urethroplasty for urethral stricture disease in adult men

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 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.
Title
Simple urethral dilatation, endoscopic urethrotomy, and urethroplasty for urethral stricture disease in adult men
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006934.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan SW Wong, Omar M Aboumarzouk, Radhakrishna Narahari, Anna O'Riordan, Robert Pickard

Abstract

Strictures of the urethra are the most common cause of obstructed micturition in younger men and frequently recur after initial treatment. Standard treatment comprises internal widening of the strictured area by simple dilatation or by telescope-guided internal cutting (optical urethrotomy), but these interventions are associated with a high failure rate requiring repeated treatment. The alternative option of open urethroplasty whereby the urethral lumen is permanently widened by removal or grafting of the strictured segment is less likely to fail but requires greater expertise. Findings of Improved choice of graft material and shortened hospital stay suggest that urethroplasty may be under utilised. The extent and quality of evidence guiding treatment choice for this condition are uncertain.  

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 114%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 100%
Researcher 7 100%
Student > Master 7 100%
Student > Bachelor 6 86%
Other 8 114%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 429%
Social Sciences 3 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 29%
Decision Sciences 1 14%
Other 2 29%

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 22 February 2013.
All research outputs
#6,788,875
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,124
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,484
of 250,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#324
of 433 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 250,265 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 433 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.