↓ Skip to main content

Guidewire-assisted cannulation of the common bile duct for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

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.
Title
Guidewire-assisted cannulation of the common bile duct for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009662.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frances Tse, Yuhong Yuan, Paul Moayyedi, Grigorios I Leontiadis

Abstract

Cannulation techniques have been recognized to be important in causing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). However, considerable controversy exists about the usefulness of the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique for the prevention of PEP.

Mendeley readers

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.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 60 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 23%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Student > Postgraduate 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Other 15 25%
Unknown 1 2%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 61%
Unspecified 7 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Psychology 3 5%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 1 2%

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 07 August 2015.
All research outputs
#3,177,149
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,497
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,375
of 252,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#286
of 445 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
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 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 252,947 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 445 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.