| Title |
Safety and prognostic value of regadenoson stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in heart transplant recipients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, January 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12968-018-0515-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Felipe Kazmirczak, Prabhjot S. Nijjar, Lei Zhang, Andrew Hughes, Ko-Hsuan Amy Chen, Osama Okasha, Cindy M. Martin, Mehmet Akçakaya, Afshin Farzaneh-Far, Chetan Shenoy |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 13 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 8% |
| Saudi Arabia | 2 | 8% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Colombia | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 7 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 38% |
| Scientists | 7 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 23% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 12% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 12 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 24 March 2019.
All research outputs
#2,470,738
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#108
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,081
of 448,992 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#4
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 448,992 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.