↓ Skip to main content

Angioplasty versus stenting for subclavian artery stenosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 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
Angioplasty versus stenting for subclavian artery stenosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008461.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wagner Iared, José Eduardo Mourão, Andrea Puchnick, Fernando Soma, David Carlos Shigueoka

Abstract

There is insufficient evidence to guide stent usage following angioplasty in subclavian artery stenosis. This is an update of a review first published in 2011.

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 %
China 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Bachelor 8 18%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Unspecified 4 9%
Other 12 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 56%
Unspecified 8 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 September 2014.
All research outputs
#6,954,701
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,375
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,441
of 188,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#150
of 190 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 188,486 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 58% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 190 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.