↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Surgical interventions for treating pectus excavatum

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
Title
Surgical interventions for treating pectus excavatum
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008889.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paulo Eduardo de Oliveira Carvalho, Marcos Vinícius Muriano da Silva, Olavo Ribeiro Rodrigues, Antonio José Maria Cataneo

Abstract

Pectus excavatum is characterized by a depression of the anterior chest wall (sternum and lower costal cartilages) and is the most frequently occurring chest wall deformity. The prevalence ranges from 6.28 to 12 cases per 1000 around the world. Generally pectus excavatum is present at birth or is identified after a few weeks or months; however, sometimes it becomes evident only at puberty. The consequence of the condition on a individual's life is variable, some live a normal life and others have physical and psychological symptoms such as: precordial pain after exercises; impairments of pulmonary and cardiac function; shyness and social isolation. For many years, sub-perichondrial resection of the costal cartilages, with or without transverse cuneiform osteotomy of the sternum and placement of a substernal support, called conventional surgery, was the most accepted option for surgical repair of these patients. From 1997 a new surgical repair called, minimally invasive surgery, became available. This less invasive surgical option consists of the retrosternal placement of a curved metal bar, without resections of the costal cartilages or sternum osteotomy, and is performed by videothoracoscopy. However, many aspects that relate to the benefits and harms of both techniques have not been defined.

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.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 150 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 14%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Researcher 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Other 31 21%
Unknown 43 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 32%
Psychology 14 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 6%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 53 35%

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 20 December 2014.
All research outputs
#13,290,426
of 21,321,610 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,124
of 12,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,676
of 252,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#209
of 236 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,321,610 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 12,037 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.0. 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 252,164 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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.