↓ Skip to main content

Cardiac and hepatic iron and ejection fraction in thalassemia major: Multicentre prospective comparison of combined Deferiprone and Deferoxamine therapy against Deferiprone or Deferoxamine Monotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
115 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Cardiac and hepatic iron and ejection fraction in thalassemia major: Multicentre prospective comparison of combined Deferiprone and Deferoxamine therapy against Deferiprone or Deferoxamine Monotherapy
Published in
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1532-429x-15-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alessia Pepe, Antonella Meloni, Giuseppe Rossi, Liana Cuccia, Giuseppe Domenico D’Ascola, Michele Santodirocco, Paolo Cianciulli, Vincenzo Caruso, Maria Antonietta Romeo, Aldo Filosa, Lorella Pitrolo, Maria Caterina Putti, Angelo Peluso, Saveria Campisi, Massimiliano Missere, Massimo Midiri, Letizia Gulino, Vincenzo Positano, Massimo Lombardi, Paolo Ricchi

Abstract

Due to the limited data available in literature, the aim of this multi-centre study was to prospectively compare in thalassemia major (TM) patients the efficacy of combined deferiprone (DFP) and deferoxamine (DFO) regimen versus either DFP and DFO in monotherapy by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) over a follow up of 18 months.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 18%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Lecturer 2 4%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 11 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 53%
Engineering 3 7%
Physics and Astronomy 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 11 24%
Attention Score in Context

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 05 October 2018.
All research outputs
#8,320,761
of 25,522,520 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#673
of 1,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,164
of 293,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#4
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,522,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,379 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 293,608 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.