↓ Skip to main content

Ankle Injury Management (AIM): design of a pragmatic multi-centre equivalence randomised controlled trial comparing Close Contact Casting (CCC) to Open surgical Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
147 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
Ankle Injury Management (AIM): design of a pragmatic multi-centre equivalence randomised controlled trial comparing Close Contact Casting (CCC) to Open surgical Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF) in the treatment of unstable ankle fractures in patients over 60 years
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, March 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-15-79
Pubmed ID
Authors

Keith Willett, David J Keene, Lesley Morgan, Bridget Gray, Robert Handley, Tim Chesser, Ian Pallister, Elizabeth Tutton, Christopher Knox, Ranjit Lall, Andrew Briggs, Sarah E Lamb

Abstract

Ankle fractures account for 9% of all fractures with a quarter of these occurring in adults over 60 years. The short term disability and long-term consequences of this injury can be considerable. Current opinion favours open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) over non-operative treatment (fracture manipulation and the application of a standard moulded cast) for older people. Both techniques are associated with complications but the limited published research indicates higher complication rates of fracture malunion (poor position at healing) with casting. The aim of this study is to compare ORIF with a modification of existing casting techniques, Close Contact Casting (CCC). We propose that CCC may offer an equivalent functional outcome to ORIF and avoid the risks associated with surgery.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Andorra 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
Unknown 143 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 12%
Student > Bachelor 17 12%
Other 16 11%
Researcher 15 10%
Other 30 20%
Unknown 31 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 14%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Psychology 4 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 2%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 37 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 14 October 2016.
All research outputs
#1,140,790
of 12,373,620 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#259
of 2,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,156
of 190,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,620 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,454 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 190,785 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.