↓ Skip to main content

Centrifugation versus PureGraft for fatgrafting to the breast after breast-conserving therapy

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgical Oncology, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Centrifugation versus PureGraft for fatgrafting to the breast after breast-conserving therapy
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/1477-7819-12-178
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ondrej Mestak, Andrej Sukop, Yu-Sheng Hsueh, Martin Molitor, Jan Mestak, Jana Matejovska, Lucie Zarubova

Abstract

Breast-conserving treatment (BCT) leads to a progressive and deteriorating breast deformity. Fatgrafting is ideal for breast reconstruction after BCT. The most frequently utilized technique for fat processing is centrifugation. The PureGraft device (Cytori Therapeutics, San Diego, CA, USA) is a new method that involves washing and filtering the fat to prepare the graft. We compared the subjective and objective outcomes of two fat-processing methods, centrifugation and PureGraft filtration.

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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 90 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 14%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Other 10 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 22 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 46%
Psychology 8 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Unspecified 2 2%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 23 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 June 2014.
All research outputs
#18,373,576
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#1,013
of 2,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,865
of 228,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#32
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,042 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 228,027 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.