↓ Skip to main content

Bologna guidelines for diagnosis and management of adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO): 2013 update of the evidence-based guidelines from the world society of emergency surgery ASBO working group

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Emergency Surgery, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
196 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
289 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
Bologna guidelines for diagnosis and management of adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO): 2013 update of the evidence-based guidelines from the world society of emergency surgery ASBO working group
Published in
World Journal of Emergency Surgery, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1749-7922-8-42
Pubmed ID
Authors

Salomone Di Saverio, Federico Coccolini, Marica Galati, Nazareno Smerieri, Walter L Biffl, Luca Ansaloni, Gregorio Tugnoli, George C Velmahos, Massimo Sartelli, Cino Bendinelli, Gustavo Pereira Fraga, Michael D Kelly, Frederick A Moore, Vincenzo Mandalà, Stefano Mandalà, Michele Masetti, Elio Jovine, Antonio D Pinna, Andrew B Peitzman, Ari Leppaniemi, Paul H Sugarbaker, Harry Van Goor, Ernest E Moore, Johannes Jeekel, Fausto Catena

Abstract

In 2013 Guidelines on diagnosis and management of ASBO have been revised and updated by the WSES Working Group on ASBO to develop current evidence-based algorithms and focus indications and safety of conservative treatment, timing of surgery and indications for laparoscopy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users 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 289 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Morocco 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 277 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 51 18%
Other 41 14%
Student > Bachelor 39 13%
Researcher 30 10%
Student > Master 27 9%
Other 61 21%
Unknown 40 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 207 72%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Engineering 3 1%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 <1%
Other 11 4%
Unknown 46 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 October 2019.
All research outputs
#7,387,575
of 22,757,541 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#195
of 543 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,603
of 209,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,541 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 543 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 209,684 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.