↓ Skip to main content

IN.PACT Amphirion paclitaxel eluting balloon versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for infrapopliteal revascularization of critical limb ischemia: rationale and protocol for an…

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
134 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
IN.PACT Amphirion paclitaxel eluting balloon versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for infrapopliteal revascularization of critical limb ischemia: rationale and protocol for an ongoing randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-15-63
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Zeller, Iris Baumgartner, Dierk Scheinert, Marianne Brodmann, Marc Bosiers, Antonio Micari, Patrick Peeters, Frank Vermassen, Mario Landini

Abstract

The effectiveness and durability of endovascular revascularization therapies for chronic critical limb ischemia (CLI) are challenged by the extensive burden of infrapopliteal arterial disease and lesion-related characteristics (e.g., severe calcification, chronic total occlusions), which frequently result in poor clinical outcomes. While infrapopliteal vessel patency directly affects pain relief and wound healing, sustained patency and extravascular care both contribute to the ultimate "patient-centric" outcomes of functional limb preservation, mobility and quality of life (QoL).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 132 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 13%
Unspecified 16 12%
Researcher 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 24 18%
Unknown 40 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 34%
Unspecified 16 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 10%
Psychology 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 7 5%
Unknown 44 33%

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 22 October 2014.
All research outputs
#14,312,548
of 21,321,698 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#3,736
of 5,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,836
of 252,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#279
of 395 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,321,698 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 5,444 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 252,221 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 395 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.