↓ Skip to main content

Smartphone adapters for flexible Nasolaryngoscopy: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Smartphone adapters for flexible Nasolaryngoscopy: a systematic review
Published in
Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40463-018-0279-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. E. Quimby, S. Kohlert, L. Caulley, M. Bromwich

Abstract

Flexible nasolaryngoscopy is an essential component of the otolaryngological physical exam. Historically, the ability to create and share video recordings of these endoscopic exams has been limited by poor mobility of fixed endoscopy towers. The advent of smartphone endoscope adapters has allowed physicians to create and share video recordings of endoscopy in a wide variety of locations that would not have previously been feasible. This paper sought to review the literature on the effect of smartphone endoscope adapters on patient care, patient satisfaction, and resident learning. This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. A systematic literature search was performed for all relevant English language studies (1946-2017) using Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE. The study protocol was registered with the PROSPERO database. A total of 91 abstracts were identified and screened by two independent reviewers. Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, three studies were selected and subjected to full-text extraction as well as quality assessment. These studies demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy and quality of smartphone adapter-recorded videos, and a benefit of these devices on resident education. Due to the heterogeneity of included studies' methods and measures, a meta-analysis was not possible, so a qualitative synthesis of the literature results was performed. Despite a paucity of data on the subject, the present study provided a comprehensive review of the literature, and suggested overall high diagnostic accuracy, quality, and enhancement of resident education with the use of smartphone endoscope adapters for flexible nasolaryngoscopy. CRD42018086714.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 16%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 14%
Other 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 37%
Psychology 3 7%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 13 30%

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 10 May 2018.
All research outputs
#11,483,783
of 12,920,060 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery
#202
of 258 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,760
of 269,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,920,060 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 258 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 269,705 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them