↓ Skip to main content

Percutaneous Intervention in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Culprit-only or Complete Revascularization?

Overview of attention for article published in Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
Percutaneous Intervention in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Culprit-only or Complete Revascularization?
Published in
Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, November 2017
DOI 10.5935/abc.20170174
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The best approach of multivessel coronary artery disease in the context of acute myocardial infarction with ST segment elevation and primary percutaneous coronary intervention is one of the main reasons for controversy in cardiology. Although the main global guidelines do not recommend routine complete revascularization in these patients, recent randomized clinical trials have demonstrated benefit of this approach in reducing cardiovascular outcomes. For this reason, an adequate review of this evidence is essential in order to establish scientifically based strategy and achieve better outcomes for these patients who present with acute myocardial infarction. This review aims to present objectively the most recent evidence available on this topic.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 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 %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Librarian 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 9 47%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Unknown 9 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 14 December 2017.
All research outputs
#7,700,369
of 28,829,220 outputs
Outputs from Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia
#242
of 1,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,648
of 458,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia
#9
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,829,220 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,676 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 458,309 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.