↓ Skip to main content

Intravascular brachytherapy for peripheral vascular disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
200 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
Intravascular brachytherapy for peripheral vascular disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003504.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alina Andras, Monica Hansrani, Marlene Stewart, Gerard Stansby

Abstract

Interventional treatment of arteries that are narrowed and obstructed by atherosclerosis involves either bypassing the blockage using a graft; widening the artery from the inside with a balloon, a procedure known as percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA); or providing a strut to hold the vessel open, known as a stent. All of these treatments are, however, limited by the high numbers that fail within a year. Intravascular brachytherapy is the application of radiation directly to the site of vessel narrowing. It is known to inhibit the processes that lead to restenosis (narrowing) of vessels and grafts after treatment. This is an update of a review first published in 2002.

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 3 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 200 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 200 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 21%
Student > Bachelor 24 12%
Researcher 19 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 5%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 60 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 71 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 6%
Psychology 8 4%
Social Sciences 8 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Other 27 14%
Unknown 68 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 17 January 2021.
All research outputs
#7,582,741
of 26,439,667 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,873
of 13,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,438
of 322,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#170
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,439,667 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,227 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 322,615 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.