↓ Skip to main content

Critical evaluation of the MitraClip system in the management of mitral regurgitation

Overview of attention for article published in Vascular Health and Risk Management, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Critical evaluation of the MitraClip system in the management of mitral regurgitation
Published in
Vascular Health and Risk Management, January 2016
DOI 10.2147/vhrm.s65185
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ulrich Schäfer, Florian Deuschl, Niklas Schofer, Edith Lubos, Stefan Blankenberg

Abstract

The MitraClip (MC) system is a device for percutaneous, transseptal edge-to-edge reconstruction of the mitral valve (MV) in patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR) not eligible for surgery. Recently, a number of studies have underlined the therapeutic benefit of the MC system for patients with extreme and high risk for MV surgery suffering from either degenerative or functional MR. The MC procedure shows negligible intraprocedural mortality, low periprocedural complication rates, and a significant reduction in MR, as well as an improvement in functional capacity and most importantly quality of life. Presently, the MC system has become an additional interventional tool in the concert of surgical methods. It hereby enlarges the spectrum of MV repair for the Heart Team. Lately, many reviews focused on the MC system. The current review describes the developments in the treatment of MR with the MC system.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 18%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Other 9 26%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 62%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Engineering 2 6%
Decision Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 4 12%

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 20 October 2020.
All research outputs
#5,270,227
of 17,464,602 outputs
Outputs from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#192
of 643 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,853
of 376,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,464,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 643 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 376,791 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.