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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Intraosseous lipoma of the third lumbar spine: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Case Reports, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13256-015-0528-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chaipond Teekhasaenee, Koji Kita, Kenji Takegami, Eiji Kawakita, Toshihiko Sakakibara, Yuichi Kasai |
| Abstract |
Intraosseous lipoma is a benign bone tumor, and the tumor occurs more frequently in the lower extremities. We present a very rare case of intraosseous lipoma occurring in the lumbar vertebral arch and spinous process. A 54-year-old Japanese man presented with a three-month history of lumbar pain. Magnetic resonance imaging of the L3 vertebral arch and spinous process revealed high intensity on T1- and T2-weighted imaging, and it was suppressed on fat-suppression imaging and no enhancement showed on gadolinium contrast-enhanced imaging. Computed tomography imaging revealed an osteolytic change accompanied by marginal osteosclerosis in his third lumbar vertebral arch and spinous process, as well as a thinned and bulging bone cortex. An analgesic had been administered prior to his visit, but low back pain had persisted, so we performed curettage and filled the defect with hydroxyapatite bone. His low back pain was improved immediately after surgery, and no recurrence of tumor has been observed on computed tomography imaging as of three years postoperatively. Symptomatic intraosseous lipoma of spine is very rare, but the patient may be surgically well-treated by curettage and reconstruction of the benign tumor. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 27% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 27% |
| Unknown | 1 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 53% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 7% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 7% |
| Psychology | 1 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
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 25 March 2018.
All research outputs
#18,409,030
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#2,258
of 3,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,154
of 258,603 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#22
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 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 3,915 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 258,603 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 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.