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 |
A new acute scaphoid fracture assessment method: a reliability study of the ‘long axis’ measurement
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12891-018-2236-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Benjamin J. F. Dean, Nicholas D. Riley, Earl Robert McCulloch, Jennifer C. E. Lane, Amy Beth Touzell, Alastair J. Graham |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to assess the inter observer and intra observer reliability of acute scaphoid fracture classification methods including a novel 'long axis' measurement, a simple method which we have developed with the aim of improving agreement when describing acute fractures. We identified sixty patients with acute scaphoid fractures at two centres who had been investigated with both plain radiographs and a CT (Computed Tomography) scan within 4 weeks of injury. The fractures were assessed by three observers at each centre using three commonly used classification systems and the 'long axis' method. Inter observer reliability: based on X-rays the 'long axis' measurement demonstrated substantial agreement (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) =0.76) and was significantly more reliable than the Mayo (p < 0.01), the most reliable of the established classification systems with moderate levels of agreement (kappa = 0.56). Intra observer reliability: the long axis measurement demonstrated almost perfect agreement whether based on X-ray (ICC = 0.905) or CT (ICC = 0.900). This study describes a novel pragmatic 'long axis' method for the assessment of acute scaphoid fractures which demonstrates substantial inter and intra observer reliability. The 'long axis' measurement has clear potential benefits over traditional classification systems which should be explored in future clinical research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 15 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 14 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 September 2023.
All research outputs
#14,709,948
of 25,550,333 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,949
of 4,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,303
of 345,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#39
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,550,333 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,426 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 345,037 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 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 52% of its contemporaries.