↓ Skip to main content

Intraorbital foreign body projectile as a consideration for unilateral pupillary defect

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Emergency Medicine, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Intraorbital foreign body projectile as a consideration for unilateral pupillary defect
Published in
International Journal of Emergency Medicine, March 2012
DOI 10.1186/1865-1380-5-14
Pubmed ID
Authors

Craig N Czyz, Thomas P Petrie, Jonathan D Harder, Kenneth V Cahill, Jill A Foster

Abstract

Intraorbital foreign bodies are frequently the result of high-velocity injuries with varying clinical presentations. The resultant diagnosis, management, and outcome depend on the type of foreign body present, anatomical location, tissue disruption, and symptomatology. A patient who presented to the Emergency Department with a large intraorbital foreign body projectile that was not evident clinically, but found incidentally on computed tomography and subsequent plain films is reported. The emergency room physician needs to be aware of the differential diagnosis of a unilateral irregular pupil with or without visual acuity changes. The differential diagnosis for any trauma patient with an irregular pupil with significant visual loss must include intraorbital foreign body and associated injury to the optic nerve directly or via orbital compartment syndrome secondary to hemorrhage and/or edema. Patients with significantly decreased visual acuity may benefit from emergent surgical intervention. In patients with intact visual acuity, the patient must be monitored closely for any visual changes as this may require emergent surgical intervention.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 2 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Student > Postgraduate 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Unknown 6 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 42%
Sports and Recreations 1 8%
Unknown 6 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 March 2012.
All research outputs
#15,982,037
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#411
of 653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,684
of 168,626 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 168,626 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.