↓ Skip to main content

Deficient ryanodine receptor S-nitrosylation increases sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium leak and arrhythmogenesis in cardiomyocytes

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, December 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
4 patents

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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.
Article details
Title
Deficient ryanodine receptor S-nitrosylation increases sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium leak and arrhythmogenesis in cardiomyocytes
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, December 2007
DOI 10.1073/pnas.0706796104
Pubmed ID
Authors

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Chile 2 2%
Switzerland 2 2%
Spain 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 103 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 21%
Professor 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Master 8 7%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 35 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 6%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 22 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 10 October 2023.
All research outputs
#7,549,813
of 34,763,505 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#63,408
of 119,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,398
of 229,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#314
of 631 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,763,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 119,650 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.2. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 229,174 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 631 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.