↓ Skip to main content

Open versus minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion: a multi-center comparison of perioperative measures and clinical outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgical Innovation and Research, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
54 news outlets
twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
126 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 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
Open versus minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion: a multi-center comparison of perioperative measures and clinical outcomes
Published in
Annals of Surgical Innovation and Research, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1750-1164-7-14
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arnold Graham Smith, Robyn Capobianco, Daniel Cher, Leonard Rudolf, Donald Sachs, Mukund Gundanna, Jeffrey Kleiner, Milan G Mody, A Nick Shamie

Abstract

Sacroiliac (SI) joint pain is an under diagnosed source of low back pain due in part to lack of visible pathology on radiographs and symptoms mimicking other back-related disorders. Open SI joint fusion has been performed since the 1920s. This technique has fallen out of favor with the introduction of minimally invasive options. To date there has been no direct comparison between open and MIS SI joint fusion.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 85 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 14 16%
Researcher 14 16%
Student > Postgraduate 10 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 20 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 45%
Neuroscience 5 6%
Engineering 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Sports and Recreations 4 5%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 24 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 425. 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 28 September 2016.
All research outputs
#19,941
of 12,566,468 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Innovation and Research
#1
of 28 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269
of 178,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Innovation and Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,566,468 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 28 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.5. This one scored the same or higher as 27 of them.
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 178,066 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 99% 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