| Title |
Validity of a method for the self-screening of cardiovascular risk
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/clep.s158358 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
María Barroso, Silvia Pérez-Fernández, M Mar Vila, M Dolors Zomeño, Ruth Martí-Lluch, Ferran Cordon, Rafel Ramos, Roberto Elosua, Irene R Degano, Montse Fitó, Carmen Cabezas, Gemma Salvador, Conxa Castell, María Grau |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 27% |
| United States | 2 | 18% |
| Unknown | 6 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 82% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
| Scientists | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Librarian | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 15 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 16 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 05 February 2020.
All research outputs
#3,260,302
of 23,164,913 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#153
of 729 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,883
of 326,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#11
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,164,913 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 729 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 326,399 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.