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 |
Tracheobronchial foreign bodies in children – a retrospective study of 2,000 cases in Northwestern China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s86595 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jianmin Liang, Juan Hu, Huimin Chang, Ying Gao, Huanan Luo, Zhenghui Wang, Guoxi Zheng, Fang Chen, Ting Wang, Yeye Yang, Xiaohui Kou, Min Xu |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study is to report our experience in the diagnosis and treatment of tracheobronchial foreign bodies (TFBs). We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 2,000 TFB patients (1,260 males and 740 females) who were treated between January 2010 and December 2013. Chest radiography and computed tomography were performed to diagnose TFBs. The location and type of foreign bodies (FBs), anesthesia methods, and treatment outcomes and complications were analyzed. Overall, 72.5% of our patients with TFB were aged between 1 years and 3 years. Plant-based FBs are the most common FB type, accounting for 91.5%. Almost 52.1% of the FBs were encountered in the right bronchus. The coincidence rate for computed tomography-based three-dimensional reconstruction was significantly greater than that for chest X-ray examination (98.7% vs 82.0%, P<0.01). Under general anesthesia, the FBs were removed by rigid bronchoscopy. Neither anesthesia complication nor intraoperative hypoxemia occurred. There were seven deaths from acute obstructive asphyxia and eight from residual FB-induced chronic asphyxia and respiration-circulation failure. In conclusion, early diagnosis and prompt treatment of TFBs with rigid bronchoscopy under general anesthesia is effective in reducing complications and mortality in affected children. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 75% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 13 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 57% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 September 2015.
All research outputs
#15,739,010
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#705
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,213
of 276,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#26
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 276,419 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 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.