↓ Skip to main content

RP11-362K2.2:RP11-767I20.1 Genetic Variation Is Associated with Post-Reperfusion Therapy Parenchymal Hematoma. A GWAS Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Medicine, July 2021
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 (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 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.
Title
RP11-362K2.2:RP11-767I20.1 Genetic Variation Is Associated with Post-Reperfusion Therapy Parenchymal Hematoma. A GWAS Meta-Analysis
Published in
Journal of Clinical Medicine, July 2021
DOI 10.3390/jcm10143137
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elena Muiño, Jara Cárcel-Márquez, Caty Carrera, Laia Llucià-Carol, Cristina Gallego-Fabrega, Natalia Cullell, Miquel Lledós, José Castillo, Tomás Sobrino, Francisco Campos, Emilio Rodríguez-Castro, Mònica Millán, Lucía Muñoz-Narbona, Alejandro Bustamante, Elena López-Cancio, Marc Ribó, José Álvarez-Sabín, Jordi Jiménez-Conde, Jaume Roquer, Eva Giralt-Steinhauer, Carolina Soriano-Tárraga, Cristófol Vives-Bauza, Rosa Díaz-Navarro, Silvia Tur, Victor Obach, Juan Arenillas, Tomás Segura, Gemma Serrano-Heras, Joan Martí-Fàbregas, Raquel Delgado-Mederos, Pol Camps-Renom, Luis Prats-Sánchez, Daniel Guisado, Marina Guasch, Rebeca Marin, Alejandro Martínez-Domeño, Maria Freijo-Guerrero, Francisco Moniche, Juan Cabezas, Mar Castellanos, Jerzy Krupinsky, Daniel Strbian, Turgut Tatlisumak, Vincent Thijs, Robin Lemmens, Agnieszka Slowik, Joanna Pera, Laura Heitsch, Laura Ibañez, Carlos Cruchaga, Rajat Dhar, Jin-Moo Lee, Joan Montaner, Israel Fernández-Cadenas, on Consortium, the Consortium

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 30%
Librarian 2 20%
Researcher 2 20%
Unknown 3 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 30%
Unknown 4 40%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 December 2021.
All research outputs
#2,428,270
of 21,175,128 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Medicine
#894
of 9,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,681
of 342,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Medicine
#20
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,175,128 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,416 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 342,314 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.