| Title |
How Do We Reconcile Echocardiography, Computed Tomography, and Hybrid Imaging in Assessing Discordant Grading of Aortic Stenosis Severity?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, February 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.11.027 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Victoria Delgado, Marie-Annick Clavel, Rebecca T. Hahn, Linda Gillam, Jeroen Bax, Partho P. Sengupta, Philippe Pibarot |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 72 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 | 14 | 19% |
| Spain | 13 | 18% |
| Mexico | 4 | 6% |
| Canada | 3 | 4% |
| Argentina | 3 | 4% |
| Brazil | 2 | 3% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 2 | 3% |
| Russia | 1 | 1% |
| Philippines | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 20 | 28% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 45 | 63% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 15 | 21% |
| Scientists | 10 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 94 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 16% |
| Other | 14 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 19% |
| Unknown | 26 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 48 | 51% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 37 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. 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 March 2021.
All research outputs
#1,041,981
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging
#298
of 2,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,572
of 449,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging
#22
of 89 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 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 449,817 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.