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 |
Reliability and validity of measuring scale for postoperative complications in third molar surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Oral Health, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12903-018-0486-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pedro Christian Aravena, Paula Astudillo, Horacio Miranda, Carlos Manterola |
| Abstract |
Third molar removal surgery is the most frequently performed surgery in the oral and maxillofacial field with a wide range of items in the quantification of postoperative complications. For their measure, in 2014 a previous scale design was presented. The aim of this study was to determine the reliability and validity of a scale designed to measure and quantify postoperative complications in third molar surgery (TMS). A cross-sectional study of a measurement model was designed. Sixty-two patients (mean age 20.5 ± 6.6 years; 36 women) underwent TMS in three Chilean hospitals. In the postoperative check-up on the 7th day, a maxillofacial surgeon and a surgical resident performed independent postoperative assessments, applying the scale. A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to obtain validity, internal consistency, interobserver reliability and a score to categorize the severity of complications using structural equation model analysis. Nine patients (14.5%) had complications. The scale was defined by two components: "Secondary complication" and "Infection" (Cronbach's alpha 0.71; Interobserver reliability 87.7%) and three categories of postoperative complication: "without or mild", "moderate" and "severe". This study presents a reliability and validity scale called "Surgical complication assessment scale in TMS". |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 1 | 25% |
| Latvia | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 13% |
| Librarian | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 16 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 37% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 16 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 February 2018.
All research outputs
#7,488,820
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
#424
of 1,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,281
of 331,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
#13
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,490 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 331,231 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 53% of its contemporaries.