↓ Skip to main content

Esophageal perforation: diagnostic work-up and clinical decision-making in the first 24 hours

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
158 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 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
Esophageal perforation: diagnostic work-up and clinical decision-making in the first 24 hours
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, January 2011
DOI 10.1186/1757-7241-19-66
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jon Søreide, Asgaut Viste

Abstract

Esophageal perforation is a rare and potentially life-threatening condition. Early clinical suspicion and imaging is important for case management to achieve a good outcome. However, recent studies continue to report high morbidity and mortality greater than 20% from esophageal perforation. At least half of the perforations are iatrogenic, mostly related to endoscopic instrumentation used in the upper gastrointestinal tract, while about a third are spontaneous perforations. Surgical treatment remains an important option for many patients, but a non-operative approach, with or without use of an endoscopic stent or placement of internal or external drains, should be considered when the clinical situation allows for a less invasive approach. The rarity of this emergency makes it difficult for a physician to obtain extensive individual clinical experience; it is also challenging to obtain firm scientific evidence that informs patient management and clinical decision-making. Improved attention to non-specific symptoms and signs and early diagnosis based on imaging may translate into better outcomes for this group of patients, many of whom are elderly with significant comorbidity.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters 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 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Iceland 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 130 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 19 14%
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Researcher 14 10%
Student > Postgraduate 13 10%
Student > Master 12 9%
Other 37 27%
Unknown 23 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 92 68%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Unspecified 3 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 1%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 28 21%

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 19 May 2018.
All research outputs
#3,109,638
of 19,572,659 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#309
of 1,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,663
of 129,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,572,659 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,171 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 129,548 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.