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 |
Correlation between change in muscle excursion and collagen content after tendon rupture and delayed repair
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13018-017-0518-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Il-Hyun Koh, Ho-Jung Kang, Won-Taek Oh, Jung-Jun Hong, Yun-Rak Choi |
| Abstract |
The objectives of the present study were to compare changes in muscle excursion, total collagen, and collagen subtypes after tenotomy over time and after delayed tendon repair. Tenotomy on the extensor digitorum tendon of the right second toes of 48 New Zealand White rabbits was performed; toes on the left leg were used as controls. Passive muscle excursion, total collagen content, and type I, III, and IV collagen contents were measured at 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks after tenotomy. Next, passive muscle excursion and total collagen content were measured at 8 weeks after delayed tendon repair at 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks after a tenotomy. Passive muscle excursion decreased sequentially over time after tenotomy. Meanwhile, total collagen increased over time. These changes were significant after 4 weeks of injury. Type I collagen significantly increased, type III collagen significantly decreased, and type IV collagen had no significant change over time. Passive muscle excursion was negatively correlated with total collagen and type I collagen after tenotomy at each time point after tenotomy (p < 0.05). After tendon repair, increases in total collagen content after tenotomy were not reversed, despite early repairs at 1 and 2 weeks after tenotomy. Increases in type I collagen were found to be associated with decreased excursion after tendon rupture. The increase in collagen that was observed after tenotomy was not reversed by repair within 8 weeks. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 25% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 8% |
| Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 8% |
| Engineering | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
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 21 March 2019.
All research outputs
#14,328,118
of 22,950,943 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#505
of 1,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,824
of 419,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#14
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,950,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,390 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. 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 419,069 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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 51% of its contemporaries.