↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

Retrograde Inferior Vena caval Perfusion for Total Aortic arch Replacement Surgery (RIVP-TARS): study protocol for a multicenter, randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, April 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley

What is this page?

Summary Blogs Dimensions citations
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
Retrograde Inferior Vena caval Perfusion for Total Aortic arch Replacement Surgery (RIVP-TARS): study protocol for a multicenter, randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, April 2019
DOI 10.1186/s13063-019-3319-2
Authors

Jing Lin, Zhaoxia Tan, Hao Yao, Xiaolin Hu, Dafa Zhang, Yuan Zhao, Jiyue Xiong, Bo Dou, Xueshuang Zhu, Zhong Wu, Yingqiang Guo, Deying Kang, Lei Du

View on publisher site

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 21%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Student > Master 1 4%
Researcher 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 10 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Sports and Recreations 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 11 46%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 25 April 2019.
All research outputs
#5,844,100
of 23,144,579 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#2,056
of 5,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,447
of 350,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#66
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,144,579 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 350,142 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.

This page is provided by Altmetric.