↓ Skip to main content

Clinical indications for image-guided interventional procedures in the musculoskeletal system: a Delphi-based consensus paper from the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)—part I…

Overview of attention for article published in European Radiology, September 2019
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 (#18 of 2,037)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
42 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 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
Clinical indications for image-guided interventional procedures in the musculoskeletal system: a Delphi-based consensus paper from the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)—part I, shoulder
Published in
European Radiology, September 2019
DOI 10.1007/s00330-019-06419-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luca Maria Sconfienza, Miraude Adriaensen, Domenico Albano, Georgina Allen, Maria Pilar Aparisi Gómez, Alberto Bazzocchi, Ian Beggs, Bianca Bignotti, Vito Chianca, Angelo Corazza, Danoob Dalili, Miriam De Dea, Jose Luis del Cura, Francesco Di Pietto, Eleni Drakonaki, Fernando Facal de Castro, Dimitrios Filippiadis, Jan Gielen, Salvatore Gitto, Harun Gupta, Andrea S. Klauser, Radhesh Lalam, Silvia Martin, Carlo Martinoli, Giovanni Mauri, Catherine McCarthy, Eugene McNally, Kalliopi Melaki, Carmelo Messina, Rebeca Mirón Mombiela, Benedikt Neubauer, Cyprian Olchowy, Davide Orlandi, Athena Plagou, Raquel Prada Gonzalez, Saulius Rutkauskas, Ziga Snoj, Alberto Stefano Tagliafico, Alexander Talaska, Violeta Vasilevska-Nikodinovska, Jelena Vucetic, David Wilson, Federico Zaottini, Marcello Zappia, Marina Obradov

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 42 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 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 30%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 20%
Unspecified 1 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 10%
Student > Master 1 10%
Other 2 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 60%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 10%
Unspecified 1 10%
Unknown 2 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 January 2020.
All research outputs
#587,727
of 14,185,573 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology
#18
of 2,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,035
of 261,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology
#4
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,185,573 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,037 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 261,104 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 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 95% of its contemporaries.