↓ Skip to main content

Appendectomy versus antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
5 blogs
twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
150 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
298 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
Appendectomy versus antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008359.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ingrid MHA Wilms, Dominique ENM de Hoog, Dianne C de Visser, Heinrich MJ Janzing

Abstract

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common causes of acute abdominal pain. Present day treatment of choice for acute appendicitis is appendectomy, however complications are inherent to operative treatment. Though surgical appendectomy remains the standard treatment, several investigators have investigated conservative antibiotic treatment of acute appendicitis and reported good results.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 298 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Iceland 1 <1%
Other 3 1%
Unknown 284 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 63 21%
Student > Master 53 18%
Researcher 34 11%
Student > Postgraduate 31 10%
Other 30 10%
Other 54 18%
Unknown 33 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 217 73%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 3%
Psychology 3 1%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 1%
Other 12 4%
Unknown 42 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 25 December 2019.
All research outputs
#511,925
of 15,329,610 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,367
of 11,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,521
of 213,699 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#61
of 476 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,329,610 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,170 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 213,699 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 476 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.