The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Interventions for the treatment of fractures of the mandibular condyle
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd006538.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mohammad O Sharif, Zbys Fedorowicz, Peter Drews, Mona Nasser, Mojtaba Dorri, Tim Newton, Richard Oliver |
| Abstract |
Fractures of the condylar process account for between 25% and 35% of all mandibular fractures. Treatment options for fractures of the condyles consist of either the closed method or by open reduction with fixation. Complications may be associated with either treatment option; for the closed approach these can include malocclusion, particularly open bites, reduced posterior facial height and facial asymmetry in addition to chronic pain and reduced mobility. A cutaneous scar and temporary paralysis of the facial nerve are not infrequent complications associated with the open approach. There is a lack of consensus currently surrounding the indications for either surgical or non-surgical treatment of fractures of the mandibular condyle. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 167 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 164 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 34 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 13% |
| Researcher | 14 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 27 | 16% |
| Unknown | 47 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 89 | 53% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 1% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 6 | 4% |
| Unknown | 56 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 18 February 2020.
All research outputs
#6,471,259
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,754
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,005
of 102,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#43
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 102,892 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.