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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Spontaneous regression of intracranial aneurysm following remote ruptured aneurysm treatment with pipeline stent assisted coiling
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-011931.rep |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Asterios Tsimpas, William W Ashley, Anand V Germanwala |
| Abstract |
Spontaneous aneurysm regression is a rare phenomenon. We present the interesting case of a 54-year-old woman who was admitted with a Hunt/Hess grade IV, Fisher grade III subarachnoid hemorrhage and multiple intracranial aneurysms. She was treated with coiling of the largest paraclinoid aneurysm and placement of a flow diverting pipeline embolization device that covered all internal carotid artery (ICA) aneurysms. A follow-up angiogram at 6 months showed remodeling of the ICA with complete obliteration of all treated aneurysms. A distant, untreated, right frontal M2 aneurysm regressed spontaneously, after the flow was diverted away from it with the stent. The literature is reviewed, and potential pathophysiological mechanisms leading to aneurysm regression are discussed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 19% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Librarian | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 25% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 31% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 26 August 2015.
All research outputs
#8,151,546
of 25,388,837 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery
#1,601
of 2,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,494
of 276,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery
#6
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,388,837 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,661 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 276,074 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 60 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 91% of its contemporaries.