↓ Skip to main content

Development and Validation of the Scoring System of Appendicitis Severity 2.0

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Surgery, June 2024
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
283 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development and Validation of the Scoring System of Appendicitis Severity 2.0
Published in
JAMA Surgery, June 2024
DOI 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.0235
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jochem C. G. Scheijmans, Wouter J. Bom, Umme Habiba Ghori, Anna A. W. van Geloven, Gerjon Hannink, Charles C. van Rossem, Lieke van de Wouw, Peter M. Huisman, Annemiek van Hemert, Rutger J. Franken, Steven J. Oosterling, Camiel Rosman, Lianne Koens, Jaap Stoker, Marcel G. W. Dijkgraaf, Marja A. Boermeester, F Alberts, S Bachiri, MA den Bakker, B Bisschops, E Boersma, MDM Bolmers, WM Bosman, H Bril, C Buurman, EFW Courrech Staal, P Davids, RS Deniz, R Detering, BL Dijkstra, P Drillenburg, A Dinaux, P van Duijvendijk, WJ van Eden, S Gans, M Gaspersz, AM van Geel, MF Gerhards, JWC Gratama, I Groenendijk, P Hellebrekers, M Henebiens, H Heydari, K in ’t Hof, TJ Hoogteijling, G van Ingen, S Jensch, AM Jonker, F Joosten, N Kraaijvanger, KC Kuijpers, TYS Le Large, D Linzel, MHJ Loos, AMF Lopes Cardozo, LB Meijer-Jorna, M Mulder, N Mullaart, J Oudejans, T Pappot, S Peeters, C Pleiter, MA de Roos, MM Scheurkogel, L Scholten, T Schut, OWT Tiddens, S Ubels, FEE de Vries, LFJ Walraven, EMA Wiegerinck, JK Wiggers, M Witt, N Wolfhagen

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 283 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 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 %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 25%
Researcher 1 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 13%
Unspecified 1 13%
Student > Bachelor 1 13%
Other 1 13%
Unknown 1 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 63%
Arts and Humanities 1 13%
Sports and Recreations 1 13%
Unspecified 1 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 173. 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 26 June 2024.
All research outputs
#245,202
of 26,198,325 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Surgery
#260
of 5,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,031
of 200,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Surgery
#4
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,198,325 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,917 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 200,481 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.