↓ Skip to main content

Cardiac tachyarrhythmias and patient values and preferences for their management: the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) consensus document endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia…

Overview of attention for article published in Europace, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 1,607)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
13 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Cardiac tachyarrhythmias and patient values and preferences for their management: the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) consensus document endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulación Cardíaca y Electrofisiología (SOLEACE)
Published in
Europace, June 2015
DOI 10.1093/europace/euv233
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deirdre A. Lane, Luis Aguinaga, Carina Blomström-Lundqvist, Giuseppe Boriani, Gheorge-Andrei Dan, Mellanie True Hills, Elaine M. Hylek, Stephen A. LaHaye, Gregory Y.H. Lip, Trudie Lobban, John Mandrola, Pamela J. McCabe, Susanne S. Pedersen, Ron Pisters, Simon Stewart, Kathryn Wood, Tatjana S. Potpara, Bulent Gorenek, Jamie Beth Conti, Roberto Keegan, Suzannah Power, Jeroen Hendriks, Philippe Ritter, Hugh Calkins, Francesco Violi, Jodie Hurwitz

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 63 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 18%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Postgraduate 7 11%
Professor 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Other 15 23%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 39%
Unspecified 7 11%
Psychology 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 12 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 18 October 2017.
All research outputs
#259,978
of 12,024,798 outputs
Outputs from Europace
#27
of 1,607 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,888
of 237,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Europace
#1
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,024,798 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,607 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 237,390 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 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 98% of its contemporaries.