↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Shouldice technique versus other open techniques for inguinal hernia repair

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2012
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 (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
33 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
120 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
144 Mendeley
Title
Shouldice technique versus other open techniques for inguinal hernia repair
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001543.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bruno Amato, Lorenzo Moja, Salvatore Panico, Giovanni Persico, Corrado Rispoli, Nicola Rocco, Ivan Moschetti

Abstract

Inguinal hernia repair is the most frequent operation in general surgery. There are several techniques: the Shouldice technique is sometimes considered the best method but different techniques are used as the "gold standard" for open hernia repair. Outcome measures, such as recurrence rates, complications and length of post operative stay, vary considerably among the various techniques.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 141 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 11%
Researcher 14 10%
Student > Postgraduate 12 8%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Other 30 21%
Unknown 43 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 73 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Psychology 6 4%
Social Sciences 3 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 43 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 22 August 2022.
All research outputs
#1,783,738
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,814
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,929
of 174,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#42
of 186 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 174,458 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 186 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.