| Title |
Diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease using computed tomography angiography in patients with stable chest pain depending on clinical probability and in clinically important subgroups: meta-analysis of individual patient data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Medical Journal, June 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1136/bmj.l1945 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robert Haase, Peter Schlattmann, Pascal Gueret, Daniele Andreini, Gianluca Pontone, Hatem Alkadhi, Jörg Hausleiter, Mario J Garcia, Sebastian Leschka, Willem B Meijboom, Elke Zimmermann, Bernhard Gerber, U Joseph Schoepf, Abbas A Shabestari, Bjarne L Nørgaard, Matthijs F L Meijs, Akira Sato, Kristian A Ovrehus, Axel C P Diederichsen, Shona M M Jenkins, Juhani Knuuti, Ashraf Hamdan, Bjørn A Halvorsen, Vladimir Mendoza-Rodriguez, Carlos E Rochitte, Johannes Rixe, Yung Liang Wan, Christoph Langer, Nuno Bettencourt, Eugenio Martuscelli, Said Ghostine, Ronny R Buechel, Konstantin Nikolaou, Hans Mickley, Lin Yang, Zhaqoi Zhang, Marcus Y Chen, David A Halon, Matthias Rief, Kai Sun, Beatrice Hirt-Moch, Hiroyuki Niinuma, Roy P Marcus, Simone Muraglia, Réda Jakamy, Benjamin J Chow, Philipp A Kaufmann, Jean-Claude Tardif, Cesar Nomura, Klaus F Kofoed, Jean-Pierre Laissy, Armin Arbab-Zadeh, Kakuya Kitagawa, Roger Laham, Masahiro Jinzaki, John Hoe, Frank J Rybicki, Arthur Scholte, Narinder Paul, Swee Y Tan, Kunihiro Yoshioka, Robert Röhle, Georg M Schuetz, Sabine Schueler, Maria H Coenen, Viktoria Wieske, Stephan Achenbach, Matthew J Budoff, Michael Laule, David E Newby, Marc Dewey |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 73 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 13 | 18% |
| United States | 11 | 15% |
| Spain | 3 | 4% |
| Germany | 3 | 4% |
| Egypt | 2 | 3% |
| Colombia | 2 | 3% |
| Belgium | 2 | 3% |
| France | 2 | 3% |
| Korea, Democratic People's Republic of | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 26 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 47 | 64% |
| Scientists | 12 | 16% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 10 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 156 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 31 | 20% |
| Unknown | 61 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 55 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 3% |
| Engineering | 4 | 3% |
| Psychology | 3 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Unknown | 74 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 123. 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 13 December 2022.
All research outputs
#328,545
of 24,876,519 outputs
Outputs from British Medical Journal
#4,083
of 63,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,953
of 359,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Medical Journal
#102
of 878 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,876,519 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 63,817 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 359,376 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 878 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.