↓ Skip to main content

Interventions for the management of mandibular fractures

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
16 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
276 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
Interventions for the management of mandibular fractures
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006087.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mona Nasser, Nikolaos Pandis, Padhraig S Fleming, Zbys Fedorowicz, Edward Ellis, Kamran Ali

Abstract

Fractures of the mandible (lower jaw) are a common occurrence and usually related to interpersonal violence or road traffic accidents. Mandibular fractures may be treated using open (surgical) and closed (non-surgical) techniques. Fracture sites are immobilized with intermaxillary fixation (IMF) or other external or internal devices (i.e. plates and screws) to allow bone healing. Various techniques have been used, however uncertainty exists with respect to the specific indications for each approach.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 tweeters 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 276 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 272 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 59 21%
Student > Bachelor 33 12%
Student > Postgraduate 30 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 11%
Researcher 27 10%
Other 57 21%
Unknown 40 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 166 60%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 7%
Psychology 9 3%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 21 8%
Unknown 47 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 December 2017.
All research outputs
#835,559
of 16,277,929 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,268
of 11,463 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,002
of 159,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#20
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,277,929 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,463 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 159,055 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.