↓ Skip to main content

Revascularization versus Medical Therapy for Renal-Artery Stenosis

Overview of attention for article published in New England Journal of Medicine, November 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
1016 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
353 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
connotea
2 Connotea
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.
Title
Revascularization versus Medical Therapy for Renal-Artery Stenosis
Published in
New England Journal of Medicine, November 2009
DOI 10.1056/nejmoa0905368
Pubmed ID
Authors

Keith Wheatley, Natalie Ives, Richard Gray, Philip A Kalra, Jonathan G Moss, Colin Baigent, Susan Carr, Nicholas Chalmers, David Eadington, George Hamilton, Graham Lipkin, Anthony Nicholson, John Scoble

Abstract

Percutaneous revascularization of the renal arteries improves patency in atherosclerotic renovascular disease, yet evidence of a clinical benefit is limited.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 353 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 4 1%
Italy 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 338 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 67 19%
Other 53 15%
Student > Postgraduate 33 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 9%
Student > Bachelor 31 9%
Other 92 26%
Unknown 46 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 246 70%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 1%
Computer Science 5 1%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 <1%
Other 13 4%
Unknown 66 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. 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 03 January 2023.
All research outputs
#820,712
of 23,989,683 outputs
Outputs from New England Journal of Medicine
#8,660
of 31,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,029
of 96,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New England Journal of Medicine
#33
of 177 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,989,683 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,581 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 121.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 96,397 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 177 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.