Recurrent acute pancreatitis: International state-of-the-science conference with recommendations
Pancreas, ISSN: 1536-4828, Vol: 47, Issue: 6, Page: 653-666
2018
- 85Citations
- 6Usage
- 70Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations85
- Citation Indexes84
- 84
- CrossRef71
- Policy Citations1
- Policy Citation1
- Usage6
- Abstract Views6
- Captures70
- Readers70
- 60
- 10
Conference Paper Description
Recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP) is a clinically significant problem globally. The etiology remains unclear in approximately 10% to 15% of patients despite a thorough workup. Data on natural history and efficacy of treatments are limited. We aimed to establish criteria for diagnosis, evaluate the causative factors, and arrive at a consensus on the appropriate workup and management of patients with RAP. The organizing committee was formed, and a set of questions was developed based on the current evidence, controversies, and topics that needed further research. After a vetting process, these topics were assigned to a group of experts from around the world with special interest in RAP. Data were presented as part of a workshop on RAP organized as a part of the annual meeting of the America Pancreatic Association. Pretest and Posttest questions were administered, and the responses were tabulated by the current Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. The consensus guidelines were established in the format of a diagnostic algorithm. Several deficiencies were identified with respect to data on etiology, treatment efficacies, and areas that need immediate research.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85049021073&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/mpa.0000000000001053; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29894415; https://journals.lww.com/00006676-201807000-00001; https://institutionalrepository.aah.org/gastrofaculty/10; https://institutionalrepository.aah.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=gastrofaculty; https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/mpa.0000000000001053; https://journals.lww.com/pancreasjournal/Abstract/2018/07000/Recurrent_Acute_Pancreatitis__International.1.aspx
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know