↓ Skip to main content

Perinatal/Neonatal case presentation: pulmonary artery sling associated with respiratory distress

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Perinatal/Neonatal case presentation: pulmonary artery sling associated with respiratory distress
Published in
SpringerPlus, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-015-1656-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Healey, Nitin Ron, Andrew Hromada, Manoj Chhabra

Abstract

Pulmonary artery sling is a very rare cause of pediatric respiratory distress. The estimated prevalence of the disease was first determined by Yu et al. in 2008 as 59 per million school-aged children. Associated symptoms are cough, wheezing, and feeding difficulty, all of which are common in routine outpatient pediatric clinical encounters. We report a case of a premature male neonate twin who was admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit with respiratory distress and pneumothorax. His presentation, as well as the etiology of his pulmonary disease, was felt to be consistent with those of numerous other premature infants. Akin to this was his delayed discharge on account of his slow progress with oral feeding. Parents gave a history of tachypnea and feeding difficulty to his doctors. He presented twice to the emergency room in respiratory distress. At 4 months of age, while in hospital for a pulmonary infection, he had an echocardiogram that revealed a pulmonary artery sling. We review the literature on this vascular anomaly, discuss its diagnosis and management, and critique the clinical thinking that determined this child's course from the perspective of availability heuristics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 19%
Student > Postgraduate 4 15%
Researcher 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 4 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 January 2016.
All research outputs
#20,302,535
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,459
of 1,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#332,098
of 395,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#132
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 395,522 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.