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 |
Simultaneous giant mucinous cystadenoma of the appendix and intestinal schistosomiasis: ‘case report and brief review’
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1477-7819-12-385 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Changwei Lin, Xiaorong Li, Yihang Guo, Gui Hu, Yi Zhang, Kaiyan Yang, Yi Gan, Jianyu Zhou, Lv Lv, Kai Gao, Juan Du |
| Abstract |
Both mucinous cystadenoma of the appendix and intestinal schistosomiasis are rare lesions. We report a rare case of simultaneous giant mucinous cystadenoma of the appendix and intestinal schistosomiasis. A 64-year-old man from China presented with a one-year history of pain in the right lower quadrant of the abdomen. There were no other pertinent historical findings, other than schistosomiasis. Imaging showed a large, tubular, mesenteric cystic structure extending downwards from the inferior wall of the cecum. Right hemicolectomy was performed for the appendiceal tumor. The final pathological diagnosis was mucinous cystadenoma with calcified Schistosome eggs within the mucosa and submucosa of the appendix, small intestine, colon, and lymph nodes. We deduced that the pathogenesis of appendiceal mucinous cystadenoma in our case was Schistosome eggs causing luminal obstruction, finally resulting in intraluminal accumulation of mucoid material. Postoperatively, the patient recovered well. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Librarian | 2 | 25% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 13% |
| Researcher | 1 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 63% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 12 January 2015.
All research outputs
#3,027,244
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#56
of 2,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,153
of 331,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#5
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,042 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 331,266 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 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 96% of its contemporaries.