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 |
What's in a name? Upper extremity fracture eponyms (Part 1)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Emergency Medicine, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12245-015-0075-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Philip Kin-Wai Wong, Tarek N. Hanna, Waqas Shuaib, Stephen M. Sanders, Faisal Khosa |
| Abstract |
Eponymous extremity fractures are commonly encountered in the emergency setting. Correct eponym usage allows rapid, succinct communication of complex injuries. We will review both common and less frequently encountered extremity fracture eponyms, focusing on imaging features to identify and differentiate these injuries. We focus on plain radiographic findings, with supporting computed tomography (CT) images. For each injury, important radiologic descriptors are discussed which may need to be communicated to consultants. Aspects of management and follow-up imaging recommendations are included. This is a two-part review: Part 1 focuses on fracture eponyms of the upper extremity, while Part 2 covers fracture eponyms of the lower extremity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 | 3 | 23% |
| Puerto Rico | 2 | 15% |
| Austria | 1 | 8% |
| Canada | 1 | 8% |
| Spain | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 38% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 38% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 15% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 18% |
| Researcher | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 57% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 9% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 29 September 2019.
All research outputs
#3,718,901
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#133
of 602 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,742
of 263,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#3
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 602 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 263,145 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.