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 |
Manipulative interventions for reducing pulled elbow in young children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007759.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Krul M, van der Wouden JC, van Suijlekom-Smit LW, Koes BW, Krul, Marjolein, van der Wouden, Johannes C, van Suijlekom-Smit, Lisette WA, Koes, Bart W |
| Abstract |
Pulled elbow (nursemaid's elbow) is a common injury in young children. It results from a sudden pull on the arm, usually by an adult or taller person, which pulls the radius through the annular ligament, resulting in subluxation (partial dislocation) of the radial head. The child experiences sudden acute pain and loss of function in the affected arm. Pulled elbow is usually treated by manual reduction of the subluxed radial head. Various manoeuvres can be applied. Most textbooks recommend supination of the forearm, as opposed to pronation and other approaches. It is unclear which manoeuvre is most successful. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2009. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 7 | 47% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 13% |
| India | 1 | 7% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 20% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 5% |
| United States | 3 | 5% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 55 | 87% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 13% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 6% |
| Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 25% |
| Unknown | 14 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 48% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 31 July 2020.
All research outputs
#1,358,215
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,123
of 12,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,033
of 245,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#43
of 234 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 245,909 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 234 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.