↓ Skip to main content

Early application of pulsed electromagnetic field in the treatment of postoperative delayed union of long-bone fractures: a prospective randomized controlled study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 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
Early application of pulsed electromagnetic field in the treatment of postoperative delayed union of long-bone fractures: a prospective randomized controlled study
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-14-35
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hong-fei Shi, Jin Xiong, Yi-xin Chen, Jun-fei Wang, Xu-sheng Qiu, Yin-he Wang, Yong Qiu

Abstract

Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) is reported to be an effective adjunct for the management of nonunion long-bone fractures. Most studies implement PEMF treatment after 6 months or longer of delayed union or nonunion following fracture treatment. Despite these variations in treatment, the early application of PEMF following a diagnosis of a postoperative delayed union has not been specifically analyzed. In this study, the outcomes of postoperative delayed union of long-bone fractures treated with an early application of PEMF were evaluated as compared with a sham-treated control group.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Saudi Arabia 1 <1%
Unknown 116 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 15%
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Master 16 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Other 9 8%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 33 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Engineering 5 4%
Physics and Astronomy 3 3%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 40 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 11 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,666,550
of 24,682,395 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#305
of 4,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,964
of 295,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#4
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,682,395 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 295,697 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.