↓ Skip to main content

ASAS-EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis: 2022 update

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, October 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
214 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
385 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
343 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
ASAS-EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis: 2022 update
Published in
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, October 2022
DOI 10.1136/ard-2022-223296
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sofia Ramiro, Elena Nikiphorou, Alexandre Sepriano, Augusta Ortolan, Casper Webers, Xenofon Baraliakos, Robert B M Landewé, Filip E Van den Bosch, Boryana Boteva, Ann Bremander, Philippe Carron, Adrian Ciurea, Floris A van Gaalen, Pál Géher, Lianne Gensler, Josef Hermann, Manouk de Hooge, Marketa Husakova, Uta Kiltz, Clementina López-Medina, Pedro M Machado, Helena Marzo-Ortega, Anna Molto, Victoria Navarro-Compán, Michael J Nissen, Fernando M Pimentel-Santos, Denis Poddubnyy, Fabian Proft, Martin Rudwaleit, Mark Telkman, Sizheng Steven Zhao, Nelly Ziade, Désirée van der Heijde

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 214 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 343 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 343 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 8%
Student > Master 22 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 6%
Other 20 6%
Unspecified 16 5%
Other 62 18%
Unknown 176 51%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 97 28%
Unspecified 17 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 1%
Other 24 7%
Unknown 188 55%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 234. 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 August 2024.
All research outputs
#175,222
of 26,800,077 outputs
Outputs from Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
#65
of 7,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,989
of 451,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
#5
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,800,077 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,976 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 451,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.