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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Design of COSMIC: a randomized, multi-centre controlled trial comparing conservative or early surgical management of incomplete cervical cord syndrome without spinal instability
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2474-14-52 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ronald HMA Bartels, Allard JF Hosman, Henk van de Meent, Jeannette Hofmeijer, Pieter E Vos, Willem Bart Slooff, F Cumhur Öner, Maarten H Coppes, Wilco C Peul, André LM Verbeek |
| Abstract |
Incomplete cervical cord syndrome without spinal instability is a very devastating event for the patient and the family. It is estimated that up to 25% of all traumatic spinal cord lesions belong to this category. The treatment for this type of spinal cord lesion is still subject of discussion. From a biological point of view early surgery could prevent secondary damage due to ongoing compression of the already damaged spinal cord. Historically, however, conservative treatment was propagated with good clinical results. Proponents for early surgery as well those favoring conservative treatment are still in debate. The proposed trial will contribute to the discussion and hopefully also to a decrease in the variability of clinical practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 67% |
| Norway | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 101 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 11% |
| Researcher | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Unknown | 33 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 17% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Unknown | 38 | 38% |
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 27 March 2013.
All research outputs
#14,164,012
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,109
of 4,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,727
of 282,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#49
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,028 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 282,290 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 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 50% of its contemporaries.