↓ Skip to main content

Does the use of IV tPA in the current era of rapid and predictable recanalization by mechanical embolectomy represent good value?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery, January 2016
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page
podcasts
2 podcasts

Readers on

mendeley
65 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.
Article details
Title
Does the use of IV tPA in the current era of rapid and predictable recanalization by mechanical embolectomy represent good value?
Published in
Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery, January 2016
DOI 10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-012231
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

As healthcare delivery in the USA transforms into a model that at its core requires value-based considerations, ischemic stroke is confronted by intersecting forces. Modern techniques allow rapid revascularization in the majority of patients with large vessel occlusions. Dramatic advances in the evidentiary basis for mechanical embolectomy are increasing the number of patients treated with this therapy. A key part of the therapeutic arsenal in many patients treated with interventional techniques has been concurrent intravenous thrombolysis. We consider whether this paradigm warrants change.

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 profiles of 9 X users 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 65 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 %
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 64 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 23%
Other 10 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Student > Master 3 5%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 22 34%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 34%
Neuroscience 5 8%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 28 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 29 September 2022.
All research outputs
#2,072,346
of 29,498,312 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery
#303
of 3,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,066
of 416,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery
#5
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,498,312 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,171 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 416,009 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 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 91% of its contemporaries.