↓ Skip to main content

Comparative assessment of absolute cardiovascular disease risk characterization from non-laboratory-based risk assessment in South African populations

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 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
Comparative assessment of absolute cardiovascular disease risk characterization from non-laboratory-based risk assessment in South African populations
Published in
BMC Medicine, July 2013
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-11-170
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas A Gaziano, Ankur Pandya, Krisela Steyn, Naomi Levitt, Willie Mollentze, Gina Joubert, Corinna M Walsh, Ayesha A Motala, Annamarie Kruger, Aletta E Schutte, Datshana P Naidoo, Dorcas R Prakaschandra, Ria Laubscher

Abstract

All rigorous primary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention guidelines recommend absolute CVD risk scores to identify high- and low-risk patients, but laboratory testing can be impractical in low- and middle-income countries. The purpose of this study was to compare the ranking performance of a simple, non-laboratory-based risk score to laboratory-based scores in various South African populations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Ethiopia 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Unknown 108 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Student > Master 11 10%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Other 36 32%
Unknown 15 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 12%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 18 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 02 August 2013.
All research outputs
#2,924,338
of 21,347,367 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,697
of 3,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,579
of 176,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,347,367 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,127 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 41.5. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 176,588 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them