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 |
Lipoma of the cheek presenting with recurrent sialadenitis of the right parotid gland: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Case Reports, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13256-016-1099-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Osundwa Tom, Ochola Tom |
| Abstract |
Lipomas are benign neoplasms arising from adipose tissue. Oral lipomas have been reported in the buccal mucosa, tongue, floor of the mouth and lips; however, the case of a lipoma occurring as an antecedent lesion to recurrent sialadenitis is hitherto unreported in the English literature. We report the case of an intraoral lipoma occurring with signs and symptoms of recurrent sialadenitis in a 15-year-old Kenyan girl of Kikuyu descent. The lipoma was antecedent leading to partial obstruction and stasis related to the right Stensen's duct culminating in recurrent sialadenitis of the ipsilateral parotid gland. Due to the slow growth, softness, diffuse nature and lack of pain, lipomas may exist below the diagnostic radar, hence, the need to have a high index of suspicion and utilize diagnostic aids as necessary. In this case magnetic resonance imaging was key in establishing the existence of the lipoma. The lipoma was excised with resolution of the recurrent sialadenitis. The purpose of this report is to present the diagnostic challenge emanating from the pressure effects of an intraoral soft tissue lipoma masquerading as recurrent sialadenitis with a view to improving on patient care through sensitization. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 21% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 43% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 November 2016.
All research outputs
#18,480,433
of 22,899,952 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#2,267
of 3,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,356
of 311,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#46
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,899,952 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,933 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 311,569 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.