SCCT 2012 appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization focused update A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, April 2012

Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter: 2 X users

guideline: 1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley: 67 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	ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/SCCT 2012 appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization focused update A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
Published in	Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, April 2012
DOI	10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.01.061
Pubmed ID	22424518
Authors	Manesh R. Patel, Gregory J. Dehmer, John W. Hirshfeld, Peter K. Smith, John A. Spertus, Frederick A. Masoudi, Gregory J. Dehmer, Manesh R. Patel, Peter K. Smith, Charles E. Chambers, T. Bruce Ferguson, Mario J. Garcia, Frederick L. Grover, David R. Holmes, Lloyd W. Klein, Marian C. Limacher, Michael J. Mack, David J. Malenka, Myung H. Park, Michael Ragosta, James L. Ritchie, Geoffrey A. Rose, Alan B. Rosenberg, Andrea M. Russo, Richard J. Shemin, William S. Weintraub, Michael J. Wolk, Steven R. Bailey, Pamela S. Douglas, Robert C. Hendel, Christopher M. Kramer, James K. Min, Manesh R. Patel, Leslee Shaw, Raymond F. Stainback, Joseph M. Allen

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

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country	Count	As %
United States	2	100%

Demographic breakdown

Type
Type	Count	As %
Members of the public	2	100%

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 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 %
Australia	1	1%
Unknown	66	99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status	Count	As %
Student > Master	13	19%
Other	6	9%
Student > Ph. D. Student	6	9%
Researcher	6	9%
Student > Postgraduate	6	9%
Other	14	21%
Unknown	16	24%

Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline	Count	As %
Medicine and Dentistry	35	52%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences	4	6%
Computer Science	2	3%
Social Sciences	2	3%
Engineering	2	3%
Other	6	9%
Unknown	16	24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 January 2016.

All research outputs

#11,535,088

of 34,526,284 outputs

Outputs from Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

#4,205

of 10,427 outputs

Outputs of similar age

#72,787

of 209,339 outputs

Outputs of similar age from Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

#28

of 50 outputs

Altmetric has tracked 34,526,284 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 65th percentile.

So far Altmetric has tracked 10,427 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 209,339 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 63% of its contemporaries.

We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.