↓ Skip to main content

The utility of using fiberoptic rhinoscopy in the diagnosis of nasal polyps

Overview of attention for article published in Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
7 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
The utility of using fiberoptic rhinoscopy in the diagnosis of nasal polyps
Published in
Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1710-1492-9-38
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martha Cottrill, Ruth Ko, Harold L Kim

Abstract

Symtomatology of nasal polyps (NP) is relatively non-specific and other nasal conditions that cause nasal may be mistaken for NP. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy otoscopic (OT) examination in detecting presence of NP by using fiberoptic rhinoscopy (FR) as the gold standard to confirm diagnosis of NP.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters 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 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 43%
Student > Bachelor 2 29%
Other 1 14%
Student > Postgraduate 1 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 29%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 02 October 2013.
All research outputs
#11,957,006
of 21,347,834 outputs
Outputs from Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
#401
of 810 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,436
of 187,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,347,834 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 810 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 187,778 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them