↓ Skip to main content

Non-operative versus operative treatment for blunt pancreatic trauma in children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
Non-operative versus operative treatment for blunt pancreatic trauma in children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009746.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael V Haugaard, André Wettergren, Jens Georg Hillingsø, Christian Gluud, Luit Penninga

Abstract

Pancreatic trauma in children is a serious condition with high morbidity. Blunt traumatic pancreatic lesions in children can be treated non-operatively or operatively. For less severe, grade I and II, blunt pancreatic trauma a non-operative or conservative approach is usually employed. Currently, the optimal treatment, of whether to perform operative or non-operative treatment of severe, grade III to V, blunt pancreatic injury in children is unclear.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 23%
Student > Master 6 17%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 14%
Researcher 4 11%
Other 7 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 49%
Unspecified 9 26%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Other 3 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 26 November 2016.
All research outputs
#1,046,211
of 13,039,608 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,260
of 10,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,178
of 187,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#76
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,039,608 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,444 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 187,568 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 210 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 63% of its contemporaries.