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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Lesões epicárdicas na cardiopatia chagásica são reflexo de processo inflamatório
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, April 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1590/s0066-782x2007000400022 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luiz Alberto Benvenuti, Paulo Sampaio Gutierrez |
| Abstract |
Furnish a more detailed anatomicopathological description of the epicardial lesions in chronic chagasic cardiopathy, evaluate their incidence and discuss their probable pathogenesis |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1 Mendeley reader of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 1 | 100% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 100% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 October 2022.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia
#233
of 1,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,421
of 91,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,210 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 91,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.