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 |
Parent artery reconstruction for large or giant cerebral aneurysms using a Tubridge flow diverter (PARAT): study protocol for a multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Neurology, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2377-14-97 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yu Zhou, Peng-Fei Yang, Yi-Bin Fang, Yi Xu, Bo Hong, Wen-Yuan Zhao, Qiang Li, Rui Zhao, Qing-Hai Huang, Jian-Min Liu |
| Abstract |
The treatment of large (10-25 mm) or giant (≥25 mm) cerebral aneurysms remains technically challenging, with a much higher complication and recanalization rate than that is observed for smaller aneurysms. The use of a flow diverter seems to facilitate the treatment of this special entity. In a previous single-center prospective study approved by the Ethics Committee and China Food and Drug Administration (CFDA), we obtained promising results, showing remarkable safety and effectiveness for the Tubridge flow diverter. Nevertheless, the previous study may have been limited by biases due to its single-center design and limited number of subjects. Furthermore, although various articles have reported durable results from treating aneurysms using flow diverters, increasing questions have arisen about this form of treatment. Thus, prospective, multiple-center, randomized trials containing more subjects are needed. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Egypt | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 76 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Researcher | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 26 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 38% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 31 | 41% |
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 04 May 2014.
All research outputs
#15,300,431
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#1,478
of 2,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,953
of 227,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#47
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 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 2,427 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 227,581 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.