↓ Skip to main content

Incidence and costs of hip fractures vs strokes and acute myocardial infarction in Italy: comparative analysis based on national hospitalization records

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 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
Incidence and costs of hip fractures vs strokes and acute myocardial infarction in Italy: comparative analysis based on national hospitalization records
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, December 2012
DOI 10.2147/cia.s36828
Pubmed ID
Authors

Prisco Piscitelli, Giovanni Iolascon, Alberto Argentiero, Giovanna Chitano, Cosimo Neglia, Gemma Marcucci, Manuela Pulimeno, Marco Benvenuto, Santa Mundi, Valentina Marzo, Daniela Donati, Angelo Baggiani, Alberto Migliore, Mauro Granata, Francesca Gimigliano, Raffaele Di Blasio, Alessandra Gimigliano, Lorenzo Renzulli, Maria Luisa Brandi, Alessandro Distante, Raffaele Gimigliano

Abstract

As osteoporotic fractures are becoming a major health care problem in countries characterized by an increasing number of older adults, in this study we aimed to compare the incidence and costs of hip fragility fractures in Italian elderly people versus those of major cardiovascular diseases (strokes and acute myocardial infarctions [AMI]) occurring in the whole adult population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 64 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 19%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 17 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 44%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 21 31%
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 01 April 2019.
All research outputs
#7,343,466
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#702
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,783
of 285,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#12
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 285,750 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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 57% of its contemporaries.