| Title |
Fewer-than-four ports versus four ports for laparoscopic cholecystectomy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007109.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy, Jessica Vaughan, Michele Rossi, Brian R Davidson |
| Abstract |
Traditionally, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is performed using two 10-mm ports and two 5-mm ports. Recently, a reduction in the number of ports has been suggested as a modification of the standard technique with a view to decreasing pain and improving cosmesis. The safety and effectiveness of using fewer-than-four ports has not yet been established. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 142 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 141 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 22 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 32 | 23% |
| Unknown | 36 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 33% |
| Unspecified | 22 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 5% |
| Psychology | 6 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 41 | 29% |
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 12 June 2022.
All research outputs
#14,141,940
of 22,660,862 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,369
of 12,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,666
of 224,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#202
of 236 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,660,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 224,027 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 236 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.