↓ Skip to main content

Reconstructive management of the rare bilateral oral submucos fibrosis using nasolabial flap in comparison with free radial forearm flap - a randomised prospective trial

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Reconstructive management of the rare bilateral oral submucos fibrosis using nasolabial flap in comparison with free radial forearm flap - a randomised prospective trial
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-8-56
Pubmed ID
Authors

Muhammad Faisal, Madiha Rana, Anjum Shaheen, Riaz Warraich, Horst Kokemueller, André Michael Eckardt, Nils-Claudius Gellrich, Majeed Rana

Abstract

Oral sub mucous fibrosis is a rare chronic, progressive, pre malignant collagen disorder of oral mucosa in people of Asian descent characterized by trismus, blanching and stiffness of mucosa, burning sensation in mouth and hypomobility of soft palate and tongue with loss of gustatory sensation. Betel nut chewing is the most common etiological agent. Surgery remains the main stay in severe cases and aims at release of fibrotic bands and resurfacing the raw areas with different options. Reconstruction can be done by using nasolabial flap or radial free forearm flap. The purpose of this study was to compare the mouth opening after the reconstruction with either nasolabial flap or radial free forearm flap.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 7 21%
Researcher 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 5 15%

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 11 April 2013.
All research outputs
#3,077,097
of 4,507,280 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#653
of 775 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,353
of 89,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#44
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 775 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 89,421 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.