| Title |
Off‐pump versus on‐pump coronary artery bypass grafting for ischaemic heart disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007224.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christian H Møller, Luit Penninga, Jørn Wetterslev, Daniel A Steinbrüchel, Christian Gluud |
| Abstract |
Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is performed both without and with cardiopulmonary bypass, referred to as off-pump and on-pump CABG respectively. However, the preferable technique is unclear. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 3 | 33% |
| Japan | 1 | 11% |
| France | 1 | 11% |
| India | 1 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 227 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 224 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 42 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 38 | 17% |
| Researcher | 24 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 40 | 18% |
| Unknown | 54 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 106 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 7% |
| Psychology | 10 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 19 | 8% |
| Unknown | 64 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 25 November 2021.
All research outputs
#1,945,928
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,153
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,835
of 169,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#49
of 176 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 169,202 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 93% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.