{rfName}
Ri

Indexed in

License and use

Citations

17

Altmetrics

Analysis of institutional authors

Asensio Gómez, LuisAuthor

Share

June 12, 2024
Publications
>
Article
No

Right Iliac Fossa Pain Treatment (RIFT) Study: protocol for an international, multicentre, prospective observational study.

Publicated to:BMJ Open. 8 (1): e017574- - 2018-01-13 8(1), DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017574

Authors: RIFT Study Group On behalf of the West Midlands Research Collaborative

Affiliations

- Author

Abstract

Patients presenting with right iliac fossa (RIF) pain are a common challenge for acute general surgical services. Given the range of potential pathologies, RIF pain creates diagnostic uncertainty and there is subsequent variation in investigation and management. Appendicitis is a diagnosis which must be considered in all patients with RIF pain; however, over a fifth of patients undergoing appendicectomy, in the UK, have been proven to have a histologically normal appendix (negative appendicectomy). The primary aim of this study is to determine the contemporary negative appendicectomy rate. The study's secondary aims are to determine the rate of laparoscopy for appendicitis and to validate the Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR) and Alvarado prediction scores. This multicentre, international prospective observational study will include all patients referred to surgical specialists with either RIF pain or suspected appendicitis. Consecutive patients presenting within 2-week long data collection periods will be included. Centres will be invited to participate in up to four data collection periods between February and August 2017. Data will be captured using a secure online data management system. A centre survey will profile local policy and service delivery for management of RIF pain. Research ethics are not required for this study in the UK, as determined using the National Research Ethics Service decision tool. This study will be registered as a clinical audit in participating UK centres. National leads in countries outside the UK will oversee appropriate registration and study approval, which may include completing full ethical review. The study will be disseminated by trainee-led research collaboratives and through social media. Peer-reviewed publications will be published under corporate authorship including 'RIFT Study Group' and 'West Midlands Research Collaborative'.

Keywords

Abdominal painAcute diseaseAppendectomyAppendicectomyAppendicitisClinical auditDiagnosis, differentialDiagnostic errorsFemaleHumansIliumInflammationLaparoscopyMalePelvic painProspective studiesResearch designRight iliac fossa painSurgeryUncertaintyUnited kingdomUnnecessary procedures

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal BMJ Open due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency Scopus (SJR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2018, it was in position , thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Medicine (Miscellaneous).

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from the Field Citation Ratio (FCR) of the Dimensions source, it yields a value of: 4.87, which indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: Dimensions Aug 2025)

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-08-06:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 94.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 91 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 14.95.
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 12 (Altmetric).