↓ Skip to main content

Imaging patients with renal colic—consider ultrasound first

Overview of attention for article published in Insights into Imaging, May 2015
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 (84th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
Title
Imaging patients with renal colic—consider ultrasound first
Published in
Insights into Imaging, May 2015
DOI 10.1007/s13244-015-0396-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos Nicolau, Michel Claudon, Lorenzo E. Derchi, E. Jane Adam, Michael Bachmann Nielsen, Gerhard Mostbeck, Catherine M. Owens, Christiane Nyhsen, Spyros Yarmenitis

Abstract

Renal colic is a common disease in Europe and a common cause of visit to the Emergency Department. Clinical diagnosis is usually confirmed by imaging modalities. Unenhanced computed tomography (CT) is considered the best diagnostic test due to its excellent accuracy detecting ureteral stones. However, ultrasound (US) should be considered as the primary imaging technique. It is a reproducible, non-invasive and non-expensive imaging technique, achieving accurate diagnosis in most cases without the need for radiation. Diagnosis is based on the presence of ureteral stones, but indirect findings such as the asymmetry or absence of ureteric jet, an increase of the resistive index or a colour Doppler twinkling artefact may help to suggest the diagnosis when the stone is not identified. • Renal colic diagnosis is usually confirmed by imaging modalities. • Imaging diagnosis of renal colic is based on the detection of ureteral stones. • CT is the most accurate imaging technique to identify ureteral stones. • US allows correct diagnosis in most cases without using radiation. • US should be used as the first imaging modality in patients with renal colic.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 98 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 18%
Student > Postgraduate 11 11%
Student > Master 8 8%
Researcher 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 39 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Unspecified 1 1%
Chemistry 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 39 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 23 July 2023.
All research outputs
#3,377,467
of 24,312,464 outputs
Outputs from Insights into Imaging
#195
of 1,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,674
of 270,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Insights into Imaging
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,312,464 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,078 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 270,857 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.