| Title |
Management of intraoperative hemorrhage during NOTES®: a prospective, randomized comparison
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-012-2677-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Byron F. Santos, Stephen M. Plachta, Nathaniel J. Soper, Eric S. Hungness |
| Abstract |
The optimal strategy to manage intraoperative hemorrhage during NOTES is unknown. A randomized comparison of three instruments for hemorrhage control was performed [prototype endoscopic bipolar hemostasis forceps (BELA) vs. prototype endoscopic clip (E-CLIP) applier versus laparoscopic clip (L-CLIP) applier]. |
X Demographics
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 8 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 2 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 13% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
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 03 December 2013.
All research outputs
#13,397,133
of 22,733,113 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#2,860
of 6,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,625
of 281,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#52
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,733,113 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,016 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 281,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 158 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 63% of its contemporaries.