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 |
Comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, April 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1532-429x-13-25 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julio Garcia, Lyes Kadem, Eric Larose, Marie-Annick Clavel, Philippe Pibarot |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 43% |
| Japan | 1 | 14% |
| Canada | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Scientists | 3 | 43% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 4% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 74 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 15% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 18 | 22% |
| Unknown | 14 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 58% |
| Engineering | 13 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 1% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 17 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 March 2021.
All research outputs
#8,127,820
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#643
of 1,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,597
of 122,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,388 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 122,503 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them