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.
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Una prótesis contentiva para el tratamiento de la miocardiopatía dilatada
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista Espanola De Cardiologia, January 1998
|
| DOI | 10.1016/s0300-8932(98)74784-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Francisco Torrent Guasp |
| Abstract |
A contention prosthesis is proposed for the surgical treatment of the dilated cardiomyopathy. The device of this prosthesis is based on experimental anatomical, physiological and dynamic data through which new concepts of the ventricular myocardium structure and function have been obtained. |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 February 2012.
All research outputs
#8,571,053
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Revista Espanola De Cardiologia
#527
of 1,768 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,799
of 94,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Espanola De Cardiologia
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,768 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 94,949 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.