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.
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.
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 |
Benchmarking electrophysiological models of human atrial myocytes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2012.00487 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mathias Wilhelms, Hanne Hettmann, Mary M. Maleckar, Jussi T. Koivumäki, Olaf Dössel, Gunnar Seemann |
| Abstract |
Mathematical modeling of cardiac electrophysiology is an insightful method to investigate the underlying mechanisms responsible for arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation (AF). In past years, five models of human atrial electrophysiology with different formulations of ionic currents, and consequently diverging properties, have been published. The aim of this work is to give an overview of strengths and weaknesses of these models depending on the purpose and the general requirements of simulations. Therefore, these models were systematically benchmarked with respect to general mathematical properties and their ability to reproduce certain electrophysiological phenomena, such as action potential (AP) alternans. To assess the models' ability to replicate modified properties of human myocytes and tissue in cardiac disease, electrical remodeling in chronic atrial fibrillation (cAF) was chosen as test case. The healthy and remodeled model variants were compared with experimental results in single-cell, 1D and 2D tissue simulations to investigate AP and restitution properties, as well as the initiation of reentrant circuits. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 110 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 28% |
| Researcher | 24 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Professor | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 45 | 38% |
| Computer Science | 13 | 11% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 12 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 11% |
| Unknown | 23 | 19% |
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 04 January 2013.
All research outputs
#15,209,966
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#6,465
of 13,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,799
of 280,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#181
of 398 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,491 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 280,671 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 398 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 53% of its contemporaries.