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 |
Discrepancies between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and Doppler echocardiography in the measurement of transvalvular gradient in aortic stenosis: the effect of flow vorticity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1532-429x-15-84 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julio Garcia, Romain Capoulade, Florent Le Ven, Emmanuel Gaillard, Lyes Kadem, Philippe Pibarot, Éric Larose |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 50% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| Poland | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Other | 13 | 22% |
| Unknown | 9 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 58% |
| Engineering | 7 | 12% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 14 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 October 2015.
All research outputs
#16,835,337
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#1,052
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,452
of 214,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#8
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. 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 214,416 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.