↓ Skip to main content

Antiplatelet Resistance and Thromboembolic Complications in Neurointerventional Procedures

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Antiplatelet Resistance and Thromboembolic Complications in Neurointerventional Procedures
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2011.00083
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas J. Oxley, Richard J. Dowling, Peter J. Mitchell, Stephen Davis, Bernard Yan

Abstract

Antiplatelet resistance is emerging as a significant factor in effective secondary stroke prevention. Prevalence of aspirin and clopidogrel resistance is dependent upon laboratory test and remains contentious. Large studies in cardiovascular disease populations have demonstrated worse ischemic outcomes in patients with antiplatelet resistance, particularly in patients with coronary stents. Thromboembolism is a complication of neurointerventional procedures that leads to stroke. Stroke rates related to aneurysm coiling range from 2 to 10% and may be higher when considering silent ischemia. Stroke associated with carotid stenting is a major cause of morbidity. Antiplatelet use in the periprocedure setting varies among different centers. No guidelines exist for use of antiplatelet regimens in neurointerventional procedures. Incidence of stroke in patients post procedure may be partly explained by resistance to antiplatelet agents. Further research is required to establish the incidence of stroke in patients with antiplatelet resistance undergoing neurointerventional procedures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 37 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 26%
Researcher 8 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 61%
Neuroscience 4 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Psychology 1 3%
Unknown 8 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 January 2012.
All research outputs
#19,321,307
of 24,601,689 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#7,839
of 13,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,141
of 189,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#31
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,601,689 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,674 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 189,894 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.