| Title |
Triple antiplatelet therapy for preventing vascular events: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, June 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7015-8-36 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chamila Geeganage, Robert Wilcox, Philip MW Bath |
| Abstract |
Dual antiplatelet therapy is usually superior to mono therapy in preventing recurrent vascular events (VEs). This systematic review assesses the safety and efficacy of triple antiplatelet therapy in comparison with dual therapy in reducing recurrent vascular events. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Hungary | 1 | 1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 92 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 12 | 12% |
| Researcher | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Other | 19 | 19% |
| Unknown | 24 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 53 | 54% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 29 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 27 November 2012.
All research outputs
#6,384,139
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,408
of 3,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,894
of 83,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#10
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,399 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 83,525 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.