↓ Skip to main content

Risk factors and prognosis of young stroke. The FUTURE study: A prospective cohort study. Study rationale and protocol

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, September 2011
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 (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 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
Risk factors and prognosis of young stroke. The FUTURE study: A prospective cohort study. Study rationale and protocol
Published in
BMC Neurology, September 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2377-11-109
Pubmed ID
Authors

Loes CA Rutten-Jacobs, Noortje AM Maaijwee, Renate M Arntz, Mayte E Van Alebeek, Pauline Schaapsmeerders, Henny C Schoonderwaldt, Lucille DA Dorresteijn, Sebastiaan Overeem, Gea Drost, Mirian C Janssen, Waander L van Heerde, Roy PC Kessels, Marcel P Zwiers, David G Norris, Maureen J van der Vlugt, Ewoud J van Dijk, Frank-Erik de Leeuw

Abstract

Young stroke can have devastating consequences with respect to quality of life, the ability to work, plan or run a family, and participate in social life. Better insight into risk factors and the long-term prognosis is extremely important, especially in young stroke patients with a life expectancy of decades. To date, detailed information on risk factors and the long-term prognosis in young stroke patients, and more specific risk of mortality or recurrent vascular events, remains scarce.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 142 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 16%
Student > Master 16 11%
Other 14 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 9%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Other 40 27%
Unknown 26 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 9%
Psychology 12 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 5%
Neuroscience 7 5%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 31 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 19 March 2013.
All research outputs
#3,517,355
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#418
of 2,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,628
of 130,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#4
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,408 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 130,426 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 84% 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 89% of its contemporaries.