| Title |
Stent-Related Adverse Events >1 Year After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JACC, February 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.11.058 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mahesh V. Madhavan, Ajay J. Kirtane, Björn Redfors, Philippe Généreux, Ori Ben-Yehuda, Tullio Palmerini, Umberto Benedetto, Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, Pieter C. Smits, Clemens von Birgelen, Roxana Mehran, Thomas McAndrew, Patrick W. Serruys, Martin B. Leon, Stuart J. Pocock, Gregg W. Stone |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 52 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 | 15 | 29% |
| Spain | 4 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 6% |
| Mexico | 2 | 4% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Uganda | 1 | 2% |
| Austria | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 21 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 31 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 11 | 21% |
| Scientists | 10 | 19% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 100 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 44 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 34% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Materials Science | 3 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 48 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 22 September 2022.
All research outputs
#819,978
of 25,670,640 outputs
Outputs from JACC
#2,050
of 16,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,641
of 475,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC
#44
of 312 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,670,640 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 16,880 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 475,995 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 312 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.