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 |
May osteoarticular infections be influenced by vitamin D status? An observational study on selected patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12891-015-0648-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Valentina Signori, Carlo L. Romanò, Elena De Vecchi, Roberto Mattina, Lorenzo Drago |
| Abstract |
Vitamin D deficiency has been associated with a high number of health outcomes, and its role on the immune system has been deeply investigated in recent years, although poor data are still available on vitamin D status in orthopedic infections including those of prosthetic implants. We focused on preoperative values of 25(OH)D in selected groups of patients with septic (Group A) or aseptic (Group B) prosthetic loosening, infective bone disease such as septic arthritis and osteomyelitis (Group C) and other orthopedic pathologies (Group D) to evaluate differences in the vitamin D status. A high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency was recorded among the study population (16.5 ± 5.4 ng/mL, mean ± SD). Interestingly, all patients with an infection presented a higher 25(OH)D concentration (17.7 ± 5.3 ng/mL) in respect to uninfected ones (15.1 ± 5.6 ng/mL). Significantly higher levels of 25(OH)D were observed in patients with prosthetic joint infection (18.5 ± 6.5 ng/mL), when compared with those presenting an aseptic loosening (13.6 ± 9.4 ng/mL). Deficiency in vitamin D levels have been found in orthopaedic patients. Prosthetic joint infections seems to be associated to higher values of vitamin D in respect to other bone infections or to other orthopaedic conditions requiring surgery. More studies are needed to improve the knowledge on vitamin D status in these patients and to better clarify the role of vitamin D in relation to osteoarticular infections. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Unknown | 10 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 52% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 11 | 33% |
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 15 August 2015.
All research outputs
#18,422,065
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#3,129
of 4,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,931
of 264,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#49
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 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 4,043 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 264,147 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.