↓ Skip to main content

Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy versus Sham Surgery for a Degenerative Meniscal Tear

Overview of attention for article published in New England Journal of Medicine, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
445 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
794 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy versus Sham Surgery for a Degenerative Meniscal Tear
Published in
New England Journal of Medicine, December 2013
DOI 10.1056/nejmoa1305189
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raine Sihvonen, Mika Paavola, Antti Malmivaara, Ari Itälä, Antti Joukainen, Heikki Nurmi, Juha Kalske, Teppo L.N. Järvinen

Abstract

Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy is one of the most common orthopedic procedures, yet rigorous evidence of its efficacy is lacking.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,048 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 794 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 17 2%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Finland 3 <1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Norway 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Other 11 1%
Unknown 747 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 128 16%
Other 126 16%
Student > Master 113 14%
Student > Bachelor 84 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 76 10%
Other 207 26%
Unknown 60 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 453 57%
Nursing and Health Professions 87 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 4%
Sports and Recreations 29 4%
Psychology 18 2%
Other 70 9%
Unknown 104 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1787. 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 23 May 2020.
All research outputs
#1,660
of 15,139,386 outputs
Outputs from New England Journal of Medicine
#95
of 26,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27
of 262,321 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New England Journal of Medicine
#2
of 300 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,139,386 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 26,819 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 76.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 262,321 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 300 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 99% of its contemporaries.