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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comparing Stent Thrombosis associated with Zotarolimus Eluting Stents versus Everolimus Eluting Stents at 1 year follow up: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 6 randomized controlled trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12872-017-0515-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pravesh Kumar Bundhun, Chandra Mouli Yanamala, Wei-Qiang Huang |
| Abstract |
Two thousand fifteen has been a winning year for Drug Eluting Stents (DES). Increase in the number of patients with cardiovascular diseases treated by Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) has resulted to a high demand for second generation DES. This current analysis aimed to compare the different types of Stent Thrombosis (ST) associated with Zotarolimus Eluting Stents (ZES) versus Everolimus Eluting Stents (EES) at 1 year follow up. Electronic databases were searched for studies comparing ZES with EES. Different types of ST reported at 1 year follow up were considered as the primary endpoints in this analysis. Odds Ratios (OR) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) were used as the statistical parameters and the pooled analyses were carried out by the RevMan 5 · 3 software. A total number of 10,512 patients were included in this analysis. No significant difference in any definite ST, acute definite ST, subacute definite ST, and late definite ST were observed between ZES and EES, at 1 year follow up with OR: 1.70, 95% CI: 0.92 - 3.16; P = 0.09, OR: 3.44, 95% CI: 0.82 - 14.43; P = 0.09, OR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.43 - 2.95; P = 0.80 and OR: 2.39, 95% CI: 0.83 - 6.85; P = 0.11 respectively. Moreover, any definite or probable ST and definite/probable/possible ST were also not significantly different with OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 0.89 - 2.17; P = 0.15 and OR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.84 - 1.70; P = 0.33 respectively. In addition, any probable ST, acute probable ST, late probable ST and possible ST were also not significantly different at 1 year follow up with OR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.60 - 2.05; P = 0.75, OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.12 - 2.40; P = 0.41, OR: 1.67, 95% CI: 0.35 - 7.86; P = 0.52 and OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.64 - 1.82; P = 0.78 respectively. At 1 year follow up, ZES were not associated with significantly lower or higher definite and probable ST compared to EES. In addition, no significant difference was observed in acute, subacute and late definite or probable ST. However, further trials are recommended to assess the effects of these second-generation DES during the long-term. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mauritius | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 11 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 38% |
| Engineering | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Energy | 1 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 11 | 42% |
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 16 March 2017.
All research outputs
#15,450,375
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#846
of 1,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,694
of 308,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#20
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,629 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 308,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.