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 |
Current concepts in locking plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13018-017-0639-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christoph J. Laux, Florian Grubhofer, Clément M. L. Werner, Hans-Peter Simmen, Georg Osterhoff |
| Abstract |
Despite numerous available treatment strategies, the management of complex proximal humeral fractures remains demanding. Impaired bone quality and considerable comorbidities pose special challenges in the growing aging population. Complications after operative treatment are frequent, in particular loss of reduction with varus malalignment and subsequent screw cutout. Locking plate fixation has become a standard in stabilizing these fractures, but surgical revision rates of up to 25% stagnate at high levels. Therefore, it seems of utmost importance to select the right treatment for the right patient. This article provides an overview of available classification systems, indications for operative treatment, important pathoanatomic principles, and latest surgical strategies in locking plate fixation. The importance of correct reduction of the medial cortices, the use of calcar screws, augmentation with bone cement, double-plate fixation, and auxiliary intramedullary bone graft stabilization are discussed in detail. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 67% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 133 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 14% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Researcher | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 31 | 23% |
| Unknown | 36 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 58 | 44% |
| Engineering | 12 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Unknown | 48 | 36% |
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 27 March 2018.
All research outputs
#4,526,460
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#162
of 1,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,691
of 320,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#1
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,398 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 320,358 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.