↓ Skip to main content

Two accessory muscles of leg: potential source of entrapment of posterior tibial vessels

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical & Radiologic Anatomy, October 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
1 Mendeley
Title
Two accessory muscles of leg: potential source of entrapment of posterior tibial vessels
Published in
Surgical & Radiologic Anatomy, October 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00276-018-2115-0
Authors

Satheesha B. Nayak, Surekha Devadasa Shetty

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 1 Mendeley reader of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 1 100%
Unspecified 1 100%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 1 100%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 100%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 24 October 2018.
All research outputs
#8,588,784
of 13,668,760 outputs
Outputs from Surgical & Radiologic Anatomy
#168
of 335 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,147
of 309,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical & Radiologic Anatomy
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,668,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 335 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 309,811 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.