↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Lower extremity amputation in peripheral artery disease: improving patient outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Vascular Health and Risk Management, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#16 of 609)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
Title
Lower extremity amputation in peripheral artery disease: improving patient outcomes
Published in
Vascular Health and Risk Management, July 2014
DOI 10.2147/vhrm.s50588
Pubmed ID
Authors

Schuyler Jones, Aparna Swaminathan, Manesh Patel, Sreekanth Vemulapalli

Abstract

Peripheral artery disease affects over eight million Americans and is associated with an increased risk of mortality, cardiovascular disease, functional limitation, and limb loss. In its most severe form, critical limb ischemia, patients are often treated with lower extremity (LE) amputation (LEA), although the overall incidence of LEA is declining. In the US, there is significant geographic variation in the performing of major LEA. The rate of death after major LEA in the US is approximately 48% at 1 year and 71% at 3 years. Despite this significant morbidity and mortality, the use of diagnostic testing (both noninvasive and invasive testing) in the year prior to LEA is low and varies based on patient, provider, and regional factors. In this review we discuss the significance of LEA and methods to reduce its occurrence. These methods include improved recognition of the risk factors for LEA by clinicians and patients, strong advocacy for noninvasive and/or invasive imaging prior to LEA, improved endovascular revascularization techniques, and novel therapies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Romania 1 <1%
Unknown 101 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 15 15%
Other 14 14%
Student > Postgraduate 13 13%
Researcher 11 11%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 17 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Engineering 8 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 22 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 21 February 2020.
All research outputs
#674,664
of 15,685,682 outputs
Outputs from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#16
of 609 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,700
of 195,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,685,682 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 609 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 195,525 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 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