↓ Skip to main content

Defining Global Benchmarks in Bariatric Surgery: A Retrospective Multicenter Analysis of Minimally Invasive Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy.

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgery, November 2019
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
104 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
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
Defining Global Benchmarks in Bariatric Surgery: A Retrospective Multicenter Analysis of Minimally Invasive Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy.
Published in
Annals of Surgery, November 2019
DOI 10.1097/sla.0000000000003512
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Gero, Dimitri A Raptis, Wouter Vleeschouwers, Sophie L van Veldhuisen, Andres San Martin, Yao Xiao, Manoela Galvao, Marcoandrea Giorgi, Marine Benois, Felipe Espinoza, Marianne Hollyman, Aaron Lloyd, Hanna Hosa, Henner Schmidt, José Luis Garcia-Galocha, Simon van de Vrande, Sonja Chiappetta, Emanuele Lo Menzo, Cristina Mamédio Aboud, Sandra Gagliardo Lüthy, Philippa Orchard, Steffi Rothe, Gerhard Prager, Dimitri J Pournaras, Ricardo Cohen, Raul Rosenthal, Rudolf Weiner, Jacques Himpens, Antonio Torres, Kelvin Higa, Richard Welbourn, Marcos Berry, Camilo Boza, Antonio Iannelli, Sivamainthan Vithiananthan, Almino Ramos, Torsten Olbers, Matias Sepúlveda, Eric J Hazebroek, Bruno Dillemans, Roxane D Staiger, Milo A Puhan, Ralph Peterli, Marco Bueter

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 114 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 13%
Researcher 11 10%
Other 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 6%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 46 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 32%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Unspecified 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 56 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 51. 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 27 December 2019.
All research outputs
#739,287
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgery
#415
of 8,701 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,516
of 364,654 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgery
#17
of 176 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 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 8,701 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 364,654 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 176 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 90% of its contemporaries.