| 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 369 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% |
| Ukraine | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 362 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 55 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 54 | 15% |
| Researcher | 30 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 27 | 7% |
| Other | 81 | 22% |
| Unknown | 93 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 187 | 51% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 31 | 8% |
| Engineering | 13 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 21 | 6% |
| Unknown | 102 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 17 July 2022.
All research outputs
#5,477,839
of 25,481,734 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#1,419
of 7,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,070
of 108,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#14
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,481,734 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,311 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 108,740 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 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 60% of its contemporaries.