↓ Skip to main content

Update on Clubfoot: Etiology and Treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, February 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
124 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
177 Mendeley
Title
Update on Clubfoot: Etiology and Treatment
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, February 2009
DOI 10.1007/s11999-009-0734-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew B. Dobbs, Christina A. Gurnett

Abstract

Although clubfoot is one of the most common congenital abnormalities affecting the lower limb, it remains a challenge not only to understand its genetic origins but also to provide effective long-term treatment. This review provides an update on the etiology of clubfoot as well as current treatment strategies. Understanding the exact genetic etiology of clubfoot may eventually be helpful in determining both prognosis and the selection of appropriate treatment methods in individual patients. The primary treatment goal is to provide long-term correction with a foot that is fully functional and pain-free. To achieve this, a combination of approaches that applies the strengths of several methods (Ponseti method and French method) may be needed. Avoidance of extensive soft-tissue release operations in the primary treatment should be a priority, and the use of surgery for clubfoot correction should be limited to an "a la carte" mode and only after failed conservative methods.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Ukraine 1 <1%
Luxembourg 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 170 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 32 18%
Student > Postgraduate 31 18%
Researcher 22 12%
Student > Master 20 11%
Other 16 9%
Other 56 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 116 66%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 11%
Unspecified 13 7%
Engineering 10 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Other 11 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 October 2017.
All research outputs
#3,383,079
of 11,927,787 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#1,440
of 5,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,156
of 195,872 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#48
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,927,787 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,193 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 195,872 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 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 62% of its contemporaries.