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 |
Esophagus perforation and myocardial penetration caused by swallowing of a foreign body leading to a misdiagnosis of acute coronary syndrome: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Case Reports, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13256-015-0532-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Uysal Erdal, Dokur Mehmet, Kirdak Turkay, Ikidag A Mehmet, Nacak Ibrahim, Bakir Hasan |
| Abstract |
Here we present our clinical experience in a case of esophagus perforation due to the swallowing of a bone piece causing acute angina pectoris and leading to misdiagnosis of acute coronary syndrome. A 73-year-old Caucasian man underwent urgent coronary angiography with possible diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome. His coronary arteries were found to be normal. A computed tomography examination revealed esophagus perforation by a foreign body (a piece of bone), and he underwent urgent left thoracotomy and the foreign body was removed. Sometimes, even a piece of bone within a meal can lead to esophagus perforation, and injure the pericardium and myocardium. The symptoms of esophagus perforation may be confused with acute coronary syndrome due to their similarities and lack of knowledge about the detailed clinical history as shown in our case. Thus, careful consideration of detailed clinical history as well as choosing an appropriate medical imaging modality, such as computed tomography, should always be kept in mind in order to promptly diagnose and start early treatment to reduce mortality. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 7% |
| Librarian | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 21% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 March 2015.
All research outputs
#17,750,476
of 22,794,367 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#1,905
of 3,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,486
of 259,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#20
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,794,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,915 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 259,041 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.