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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Quantitative Assessment of Mitral Regurgitation Validation of New Methods
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JACC, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.05.048 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paaladinesh Thavendiranathan, Dermot Phelan, James D. Thomas, Scott D. Flamm, Thomas H. Marwick |
| Abstract |
Accurate assessment of mitral regurgitation (MR) severity is important for clinical decision making, prognostication, and decisions regarding timing of surgical intervention. The most common method for noninvasive assessment of MR has been with 2-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography, which is often used as a qualitative tool. Several newer noninvasive modalities including 3-dimensional echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and cardiac computed tomography have also become available for this purpose; however, their role in routine clinical practice is not clearly defined. In this review, we provide an overview of these newer modalities for quantitative assessment of MR severity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 96 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 18 | 18% |
| Researcher | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 28 | 28% |
| Unknown | 13 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 62 | 62% |
| Engineering | 9 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Energy | 1 | 1% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 23 | 23% |
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 16 June 2019.
All research outputs
#8,621,588
of 25,727,480 outputs
Outputs from JACC
#9,923
of 16,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,824
of 192,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC
#83
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,727,480 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,904 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.0. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 192,155 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.