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 |
Reduced anticoagulation after mechanical aortic valve replacement: Interim results from the Prospective Randomized On-X Valve Anticoagulation Clinical Trial randomized Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2014.01.004 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
John Puskas, Marc Gerdisch, Dennis Nichols, Reed Quinn, Charles Anderson, Birger Rhenman, Lilibeth Fermin, Michael McGrath, Bobby Kong, Chad Hughes, Gulshan Sethi, Michael Wait, Tomas Martin, Allen Graeve, PROACT Investigators |
| Abstract |
Under Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption, the Prospective Randomized On-X Anticoagulation Clinical Trial (PROACT) has been testing the safety of less aggressive anticoagulation than recommended by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines after implantation of an approved bileaflet mechanical valve. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 235 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 225 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 32 | 14% |
| Other | 22 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 17 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 7% |
| Other | 54 | 23% |
| Unknown | 73 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 102 | 43% |
| Engineering | 10 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 5% |
| Unknown | 92 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 77. 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 29 January 2019.
All research outputs
#550,336
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
#28
of 7,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,488
of 319,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
#2
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,009 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 319,434 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 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 97% of its contemporaries.