↓ Skip to main content

Posicionamento sobre Diagnóstico e Tratamento da Amiloidose Cardíaca – 2021

Overview of attention for article published in Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, September 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Posicionamento sobre Diagnóstico e Tratamento da Amiloidose Cardíaca – 2021
Published in
Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, September 2021
DOI 10.36660/abc.20210718
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcus V. Simões, Fabio Fernandes, Fabiana G. Marcondes-Braga, Philip Scheinberg, Edileide de Barros Correia, Luis Eduardo P. Rohde, Fernando Bacal, Silvia Marinho Martins Alves, Sandrigo Mangini, Andréia Biolo, Luis Beck-da-Silva, Roberta Shcolnik Szor, Wilson Marques, Acary Souza Bulle Oliveira, Márcia Waddington Cruz, Bruno Vaz Kerges Bueno, Ludhmila Abrahão Hajjar, Aurora Felice Castro Issa, Felix José Alvarez Ramires, Otavio Rizzi Coelho, André Schmidt, Ibraim Masciarelli Francisco Pinto, Carlos Eduardo Rochitte, Marcelo Luiz Campos Vieira, Cláudio Tinoco Mesquita, Celso Dario Ramos, José Soares-Junior, Minna Moreira Dias Romano, Wilson Mathias, Marcelo Iório Garcia, Marcelo Westerlund Montera, Marcelo Dantas Tavares de Melo, Sandra Marques e Silva, Pedro Manoel Marques Garibaldi, Aristóteles Comte de Alencar, Renato Delascio Lopes, Diane Xavier de Ávila, Denizar Viana, José Francisco Kerr Saraiva, Manoel Fernandes Canesin, Glaucia Maria Moraes de Oliveira, Evandro Tinoco Mesquita

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 7 10%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 16 23%
Unknown 23 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 29%
Unspecified 14 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 24 34%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 20 August 2022.
All research outputs
#3,867,347
of 22,509,254 outputs
Outputs from Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia
#77
of 1,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,629
of 343,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia
#2
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,509,254 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,062 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 343,183 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 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 94% of its contemporaries.