↓ Skip to main content

Current Status and Clinical Outcomes of Oral Anticoagulant Discontinuation After Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Japan ― Findings From the AF Frontier Ablation Registry ―

Overview of attention for article published in Circulation Journal, October 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Current Status and Clinical Outcomes of Oral Anticoagulant Discontinuation After Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Japan ― Findings From the AF Frontier Ablation Registry ―
Published in
Circulation Journal, October 2019
DOI 10.1253/circj.cj-19-0602
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yasuo Okumura, Koichi Nagashima, Masaru Arai, Ryuta Watanabe, Katsuaki Yokoyama, Naoya Matsumoto, Takayuki Otsuka, Shinya Suzuki, Akio Hirata, Masato Murakami, Mitsuru Takami, Masaomi Kimura, Hidehira Fukaya, Shiro Nakahara, Takeshi Kato, Wataru Shimizu, Yu-ki Iwasaki, Hiroshi Hayashi, Tomoo Harada, Ikutaro Nakajima, Ken Okumura, Junjiroh Koyama, Michifumi Tokuda, Teiichi Yamane, Yukihiko Momiyama, Kojiro Tanimoto, Kyoko Soejima, Noriko Nonoguchi, Koichiro Ejima, Nobuhisa Hagiwara, Masahide Harada, Kazumasa Sonoda, Masaru Inoue, Koji Kumagai, Hidemori Hayashi, Kazuhiro Satomi, Yoshinao Yazaki, Yuji Watari, on behalf of the AF Ablation Frontier Registry

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Other 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 15 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 38%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Engineering 1 3%
Unknown 17 50%
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 18 April 2021.
All research outputs
#7,417,664
of 25,972,223 outputs
Outputs from Circulation Journal
#406
of 2,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,113
of 371,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Circulation Journal
#5
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,972,223 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 2,380 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. 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 371,311 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.