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 |
International assessment of inter‐ and intrarater reliability of the International Frontal Sinus Anatomy Classification system
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1002/alr.22200 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ricardo Villarreal, Bozena B. Wrobel, Luis F. Macias‐Valle, Greg E. Davis, Thomas J. Prihoda, Amber U. Luong, K. Christopher McMains, Erik K. Weitzel, William C. Yao, Joe Brunworth, David W. Clark, Salil Nair, Constanza J. Valdés, Ashleigh Halderman, David W. Jang, Rahuram Sivasubramaniam, Zhipeng Zhang, Philip G. Chen |
| Abstract |
Inconsistencies in the nomenclature of structures of the frontal sinus have impeded the development of a validated "reference standard" classification system that surgeons can reliably agree upon. The International Frontal Sinus Anatomy Classification (IFAC) system was developed as a consensus document, based on expert opinion, attempting to address this issue. The purposes of this study are to: establish the reliability of the IFAC as a tool for classifying cells in the frontal recess among an international group of rhinologists; and improve communication and teaching of frontal endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). Forty-two computed tomography (CT) scans, each with a marked frontal cell, were reviewed by 15 international fellowship-trained rhinologists. Each marked cell was classified into 1 of 7 categories described in the IFAC, on 2 occasions separated by 2 weeks. Inter- and intrarater reliability were evaluated using Light's kappa (κ), the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and simple proportion of agreement. Interrater reliability showed pairwise κ values ranging from 0.7248 to 1.0, with a mean of 0.9162 (SD, 0.0537). The ICC was 0.98. Intrarater reliability showed κ values ranging from 0.8613 to 1.0, with a mean of 0.9407 (SD, 0.0376). The within-rater ICC was 0.98. Among a diverse sample of rhinologists (raters), there was substantial to almost perfect agreement between raters, and among individual raters at different timepoints. The IFAC is a reliable tool for classification of cells in the frontal sinus. Further outcome studies are still needed to determine the validity of the IFAC. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 25% |
| Mexico | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 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 | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 49% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 14 | 38% |
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 15 September 2018.
All research outputs
#14,903,800
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology
#765
of 1,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,619
of 341,134 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology
#12
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 341,134 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 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 65% of its contemporaries.