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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
PFO closure for secondary stroke prevention: is the discussion closed?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11239-018-1633-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joseph J. Shatzel, Molly M. Daughety, Vinay Prasad, Thomas G. DeLoughery |
| Abstract |
Three previous reports of PFO closure for secondary stroke prevention failed to find any significant benefit. Recently however, three conflicting reports were published suggesting a benefit in select patients. Although we are enthusiastic for PFO closure in appropriate patients, caution is warranted in the extrapolation of this data and the application of this intervention to broader patient groups. Only small minorities of stroke patients are likely to benefit from PFO closure, the intervention has a notable complication rate, and it has not been compared against modern anticoagulation options. Clinicians should consider all of these points as discussions around PFO closure are likely to become more and more common going forward. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 32% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 16% |
| Librarian | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 4 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 53% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 08 May 2023.
All research outputs
#6,795,109
of 24,213,557 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#276
of 1,025 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,290
of 334,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#5
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,213,557 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,025 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 334,616 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.