| Title |
CAC-DRS: Coronary Artery Calcium Data and Reporting System. An expert consensus document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jcct.2018.03.008 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Harvey S Hecht, Michael J Blaha, Ella A Kazerooni, Ricardo C Cury, Matt Budoff, Jonathon Leipsic, Leslee Shaw |
| Abstract |
The goal of CAC-DRS: Coronary Artery Calcium Data and Reporting System is to create a standardized method to communicate findings of CAC scanning on all noncontrast CT scans, irrespective of the indication, in order to facilitate clinical decision-making, with recommendations for subsequent patient management. The CAC-DRS classification is applied on a per-patient basis and represents the total calcium score and the number of involved arteries. General recommendations are provided for further management of patients with different degrees of calcified plaque burden based on CAC-DRS classification. In addition, CAC-DRS will provide a framework of standardization that may benefit quality assurance and tracking patient outcomes with the potential to ultimately result in improved quality of care. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 96 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 24 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 7 | 7% |
| France | 5 | 5% |
| Mexico | 5 | 5% |
| Spain | 3 | 3% |
| Italy | 2 | 2% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 2 | 2% |
| India | 2 | 2% |
| Ecuador | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Unknown | 34 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 53 | 55% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 24 | 25% |
| Scientists | 13 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 166 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 24 | 14% |
| Researcher | 19 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 31 | 19% |
| Unknown | 52 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 72 | 43% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 4% |
| Engineering | 5 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 10% |
| Unknown | 59 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 89. 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 27 September 2022.
All research outputs
#477,109
of 25,400,630 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
#9
of 917 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,836
of 343,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
#1
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,400,630 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 917 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 343,728 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 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 99% of its contemporaries.