↓ Skip to main content

Investigating the role of capacitive coupling between the operating table and the return electrode of an electrosurgery unit in the modification of the current density distribution within the patients…

Overview of attention for article published in BioMedical Engineering OnLine, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Investigating the role of capacitive coupling between the operating table and the return electrode of an electrosurgery unit in the modification of the current density distribution within the patients’ body
Published in
BioMedical Engineering OnLine, August 2013
DOI 10.1186/1475-925x-12-80
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paolo Bifulco, Rita Massa, Mario Cesarelli, Maria Romano, Antonio Fratini, Gaetano D Gargiulo, Alistair L McEwan

Abstract

Electrosurgery units are widely employed in modern surgery. Advances in technology have enhanced the safety of these devices, nevertheless, accidental burns are still regularly reported. This study focuses on possible causes of sacral burns as complication of the use of electrosurgery. Burns are caused by local densifications of the current, but the actual pathway of current within patient's body is unknown. Numerical electromagnetic analysis can help in understanding the issue.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 16%
Student > Master 6 14%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 9 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 27%
Engineering 9 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Computer Science 2 5%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 11 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 23 November 2022.
All research outputs
#5,288,711
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#125
of 867 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,293
of 209,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 867 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 209,398 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.