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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Biventricular myocardial strain analysis in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) using cardiovascular magnetic resonance feature tracking
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12968-014-0075-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Philipp Heermann, Dennis M Hedderich, Matthias Paul, Christoph Schülke, Jan Robert Kroeger, Bettina Baeßler, Thomas Wichter, David Maintz, Johannes Waltenberger, Walter Heindel, Alexander C Bunck |
| Abstract |
Fibrofatty degeneration of myocardium in ARVC is associated with wall motion abnormalities. The aim of this study was to examine whether Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (CMR) based strain analysis using feature tracking (FT) can serve as a quantifiable measure to confirm global and regional ventricular dysfunction in ARVC patients and support the early detection of ARVC. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 97 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 18% |
| Researcher | 16 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Other | 22 | 21% |
| Unknown | 18 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 50% |
| Engineering | 7 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Psychology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Unknown | 32 | 31% |
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 10 October 2014.
All research outputs
#15,115,997
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
#969
of 1,318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,098
of 258,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
#27
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. 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 258,558 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.