↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Emergency ultrasound‐based algorithms for diagnosing blunt abdominal trauma

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
Emergency ultrasound‐based algorithms for diagnosing blunt abdominal trauma
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004446.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stengel D, Bauwens K, Rademacher G, Ekkernkamp A, Güthoff C

Abstract

Ultrasonography is regarded as the tool of choice for early diagnostic investigations in patients with suspected blunt abdominal trauma. Although its sensitivity is too low for definite exclusion of abdominal organ injury, proponents of ultrasound argue that ultrasound-based clinical pathways enhance the speed of primary trauma assessment, reduce the number of computed tomography scans and cut costs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 5%
Netherlands 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 60 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 15%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Other 17 26%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 58%
Psychology 3 5%
Engineering 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 14 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 11 August 2015.
All research outputs
#1,602,207
of 14,035,050 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,283
of 10,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,668
of 164,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#38
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,035,050 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,810 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 164,492 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 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 66% of its contemporaries.