STS Expert Consensus Document on Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Developed in collaboration with the American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography…

Overview of attention for article published in The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, January 2012

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 (86th percentile)
High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy: 1 policy source

guideline: 2 clinical guideline sources

Readers on

mendeley: 194 Mendeley
citeulike: 1 CiteULike

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	2012 ACCF/AATS/SCAI/STS Expert Consensus Document on Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Developed in collaboration with the American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Heart Failure Society of America, Mended Hearts, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
Published in	The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, January 2012
DOI	10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.01.084
Pubmed ID	22300625
Authors	David R. Holmes, Michael J. Mack, Sanjay Kaul, Arvind Agnihotri, Karen P. Alexander, Steven R. Bailey, John H. Calhoon, Blase A. Carabello, Milind Y. Desai, Fred H. Edwards, Gary S. Francis, Timothy J. Gardner, A. Pieter Kappetein, Jane A. Linderbaum, Chirojit Mukherjee, Debabrata Mukherjee, Catherine M. Otto, Carlos E. Ruiz, Ralph L. Sacco, Donnette Smith, James D. Thomas

View on publisher site Alert me about new mentions

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

Timeline

Activity

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 194 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	4	2%
Poland	1	<1%
Japan	1	<1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of	1	<1%
Spain	1	<1%
Egypt	1	<1%
Germany	1	<1%
Canada	1	<1%
Belgium	1	<1%
Other	0	0%
Unknown	182	94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status	Count	As %
Researcher	35	18%
Student > Ph. D. Student	22	11%
Student > Master	17	9%
Student > Bachelor	16	8%
Professor	11	6%
Other	42	22%
Unknown	51	26%

Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline	Count	As %
Medicine and Dentistry	92	47%
Computer Science	9	5%
Nursing and Health Professions	9	5%
Engineering	8	4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences	7	4%
Other	16	8%
Unknown	53	27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 2013.

All research outputs

#4,107,712

of 27,057,185 outputs

Outputs from The Annals of Thoracic Surgery

#894

of 9,239 outputs

Outputs of similar age

#31,238

of 258,907 outputs

Outputs of similar age from The Annals of Thoracic Surgery

of 56 outputs

Altmetric has tracked 27,057,185 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.

So far Altmetric has tracked 9,239 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 258,907 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 86% of its contemporaries.

We're also able to compare this research output to 56 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 94% of its contemporaries.