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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Incidence and severity of postoperative sore throat: a randomized comparison of Glidescope with Macintosh laryngoscope
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Anesthesiology, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12871-017-0421-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mansoor Aqil, Mueen Ullah Khan, Saara Mansoor, Saad Mansoor, Rashid Saeed Khokhar, Abdul Sattar Narejo |
| Abstract |
Postoperative sore throat (POST) is a common problem following endotracheal (ET) intubation during general anesthesia. The objective was to compare the incidence and severity of POST during routine intubation with Glidescope (GL) and Macintosh laryngoscope (MCL). One hundred forty adult patients ASA I and II with normal airway, scheduled to undergo elective surgery under GA requiring ET intubation were enrolled in this prospective randomized study and were randomly divided in two groups, GL and MCL. Incidence and severity of POST was evaluated at 0, 6, 12 and 24 h after surgery. At 0 h, the incidence of POST was more in MCL than GL (n = 41 v.s n = 22, P = 0.001), and also at 6 h after surgery (n = 37 v.s n = 23, P = 0.017). Severity of POST was more at 0, 6 and 12 h after surgery in MCL (P < 0.001, P = 0.001, P = 0.004 respectively). Routine use of GL for ET tube placement results in reduction in the incidence and severity of POST compared to MCL. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02848365 . Retrospectively Registered (Date of registration: July, 2016). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 17% |
| Japan | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Researcher | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 14 | 19% |
| Unknown | 28 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 1% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 September 2017.
All research outputs
#13,054,539
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#373
of 1,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,689
of 315,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#14
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,509 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 315,999 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.