↓ Skip to main content

What decides the suspicion of acute coronary syndrome in acute chest pain patients?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Emergency Medicine, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
What decides the suspicion of acute coronary syndrome in acute chest pain patients?
Published in
BMC Emergency Medicine, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-227x-14-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander Kamali, Martin Söderholm, Ulf Ekelund

Abstract

Physicians assessing chest pain patients in the emergency department (ED) base the likelihood of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) mainly on ECG, symptom history and blood markers of myocardial injury. Among these, the ECG has been stated to be the most important diagnostic tool. We aimed to analyze the relative contributions of these three diagnostic modalities to the ED physicians' evaluation of ACS likelihood in clinical practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 27%
Student > Postgraduate 8 18%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 3 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 56%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Psychology 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 5 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 April 2015.
All research outputs
#1,907,438
of 4,980,612 outputs
Outputs from BMC Emergency Medicine
#73
of 173 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,589
of 122,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Emergency Medicine
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,980,612 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 60th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 173 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 122,570 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.