Open Access
International Journal of Circumpolar Health
Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
SCImago
Q2
WOS
Q4
Impact factor
1.3
SJR
0.537
CiteScore
2.1
Categories
Health (social science)
Medicine (miscellaneous)
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Epidemiology
Areas
Medicine
Social Sciences
Years of issue
1997-2025
journal names
International Journal of Circumpolar Health
INT J CIRCUMPOL HEAL
Top-3 citing journals

International Journal of Circumpolar Health
(2191 citations)

BMC Public Health
(259 citations)
Top-3 organizations

UiT The Arctic University of Norway
(169 publications)

University of Greenland
(95 publications)

University of Oulu
(87 publications)

University of Greenland
(51 publications)

UiT The Arctic University of Norway
(40 publications)

University of Southern Denmark
(29 publications)
Most cited in 5 years
Found
Publications found: 483
Q1

Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Stroke Risk Stratification in Atrial Fibrillation
Zimmerman R.M., Hernandez E.J., Tristani-Firouzi M., Yandell M., Steinberg B.A.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Current risk stratification tools can limit the optimal implementation of new and emerging therapies for patients with heart rhythm disorders. For example, stroke prevention treatments have outpaced means for stroke risk stratification for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques have shown promise for improving various tasks in cardiovascular medicine. Here we explain key concepts in AI that are central to using these technologies for better risk stratification, highlighting one approach particularly well-suited to the task of portable, personalized risk stratification – probabilistic graphical models (PGMs). Probabilistic graphical models can empower physicians to ask and answer a variety of clinical questions, which we demonstrate using a preliminary model of AF-related stroke risk among 1.6 million patients within the University of Utah Health System. This example also highlights the ability of PGMs to combine social determinants of health (SDoH) and other non-traditional variables with standard clinical and demographic ones to improve personalized risk predictions and address risk factor interactions. When combined with electronic health data, these computational technologies hold great promise to empower personalized, explainable, and equitable risk assessment.
Q1

A hybrid algorithm-based ECG risk prediction model for cardiovascular disease
Zhou P., Yang Z., Hao Y., Fan F., Zhao W., Wang Z., Deng Q., Hao Y., Yang N., Han L., Jia P., Qi Y., Zhang Y., Liu J.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Aims
Little is known about the role of electrocardiography (ECG) in the community population independent of physical and laboratory examinations. Thus, this study developed and validated several ECG-based models for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment, with or without simple questionnaire-based variables.
Methods
Using a derivation cohort of 3,734 Chinese participants aged ≥40 years, we developed the ECG-based models to predict the risk of developing CVD (comprising fatal and non-fatal coronary heart disease, unstable angina, stroke, and heart failure). Candidate predictors associated with CVD were screened from hundreds of ECG characteristics using a hybrid algorithm. By incorporating the questionnaire-based predictors, we constructed the ECG–questionnaire model. All models were tested in an external validation cohort (n = 1,224) to determine their discrimination and calibration.
Results
Over a maximum follow-up of 7 years, 433 CVD events occurred in the derivation cohort. The ECG model with 37 selected features achieved comparable performance to the clinical model using traditional cardiovascular risk factors (C-statistic: 0.690, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.638–0.743) in the external validation cohort. Such performance significantly improved when the questionnaire-based predictors were added (C-statistic: 0.734, 95% CI 0.685–0.784; calibration χ2: 3.334, P = 0.950). Compared with the clinical model, 17.4% of the participants were correctly assigned to the corresponding risk groups, with an absolute integrated discrimination index of 0.048 (95% CI 0.016–0.080).
Conclusions
The ECG model with/without questionnaire-based variables can accurately predict future CVD risk independent of physical and laboratory examinations, suggesting its great potential in routine clinical practice.
Q1

Deep Learning on Electrocardiogram Waveforms to Stratify Risk of Obstructive Stable Coronary Artery Disease
Trivedi R.K., Chiu I., Hughes J.W., Rogers A.J., Ouyang D.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Aims
Coronary artery disease (CAD) incidence continues to rise with an increasing burden of chronic coronary disease (CCD). Current probability-based risk assessment for obstructive CAD (oCAD) lacks sufficient diagnostic accuracy. We aimed to develop and validate a deep learning (DL) algorithm utilizing electrocardiogram (ECG) waveforms and clinical features to predict oCAD in patients with suspected CCD.
Methods and Results
The study includes subjects undergoing invasive angiography for evaluation of CCD over a 4-year period at a quaternary care center. oCAD was defined as performance of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) based on assessment by interventional cardiologists during elective angiography. DL models were developed for ECG waveforms alone (DL-ECG), clinical features from standard risk scores (DL-Clinical), and the combination of ECG waveforms and clinical features (DL-MM); a commonly used pre-test probability estimation tool from the CAD Consortium study was used for comparison (CAD2) [3]. The CAD2 model (AUC 0.733 [0.717-0.750]) had similar performance as the DL-Clinical model (AUC 0.762 [0.746-0.778]). The DL-ECG model (AUC 0.741 [0.726-0.758]) had similar performance as both the clinical feature models. The DL-MM model (AUC 0.807 [0.793-0.822]) had a superior performance. Validation in an external cohort demonstrated similar performance in the DL-MM (AUC 0.716 [0.707-0.726]) and CAD2 risk score (AUC 0.715 [0.705-0.724]).
Conclusion
A multimodality DL model utilizing ECG waveforms and clinical risk factors can improve prediction of oCAD in CCD compared to risk-factor based models. Prospective research is warranted to determine whether incorporating DL methods in ECG analysis improves diagnosis of oCAD and outcomes in CCD.
Q1

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Aortic Stenosis within a Universal Healthcare System Characterised by Natural Language Processing for Targeted Intervention
Biswas D., Wu J., Brown S., Bharucha A., Fairhurst N., Kaye G., Jones K., Copeland F.P., O’Donnell B., Kyle D., Searle T., Pareek N., Dworakowski R., Papachristidis A., Melikian N., et. al.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Aortic stenosis (AS) is a condition marked by high morbidity and mortality in severe, symptomatic cases without intervention via transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Racial and ethnic disparities in access to these treatments have been documented, particularly in North America, where socioeconomic factors like health insurance confound analyses. This study evaluates disparities in AS management across racial and ethnic groups, accounting for socioeconomic deprivation, using an artificial intelligence framework.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a natural language processing (NLP) pipeline to analyse both structured and unstructured data from > 1 million patients at a London hospital. Key variables included age, sex, self-reported race and ethnicity, AS severity, and socioeconomic status. The primary outcomes were rates of valvular intervention and all-cause mortality.
Results
Among 6,967 AS patients, Black patients were younger, more symptomatic and more comorbid than White patients. Black patients with objective evidence of AS on echocardiography were less likely to receive a clinical diagnosis than White patients. In severe AS, TAVI and SAVR procedures were performed at lower rates among Black patients than White patients, with a longer time to SAVR. In multivariate analysis of severe AS, controlling for socioeconomic status, Black patients experienced higher mortality (HR=1.42, 95% CI=1.05-1.92, P=0.02).
Conclusions
An artificial intelligence framework characterises racial and ethnic disparities in AS management, which persist in a universal healthcare system, highlighting targets for future healthcare interventions.
Q1

Unsupervised Clustering of Single-Lead ECGs Associates with Prevalent and Incident Heart Failure in Coronary Artery Disease
Madrid J., Young W.J., van Duijvenboden S., Orini M., Munroe P.B., Ramírez J., Mincholé A.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Aims
Clinical consequences of coronary artery disease (CAD) are varied (e.g., atrial fibrillation [AF] and heart failure [HF]) and current risk stratification tools are ineffective. We aimed to identify clusters of individuals with CAD exhibiting unique patterns on the electrocardiogram (ECG) in an unsupervised manner and assess their association with cardiovascular risk.
Methods
Twenty-one ECG markers were derived from single-lead median-beat ECGs of 1,928 individuals with CAD without a previous diagnosis of AF, HF or ventricular arrhythmia (VA) from the imaging study in UK Biobank (CAD-IMG-UKB). An unsupervised clustering algorithm was used to group these markers into distinct clusters. We characterized each cluster according to their demographic and ECG characteristics, as well as their prevalent and incident risk of AF, HF and VA (4-year median follow-up). Validation and association with prevalent diagnoses was performed in an independent cohort of 1,644 individuals.
Results
The model identified two clusters within the CAD-IMG-UKB cohort. Cluster 1 (N=359) exhibited prolonged QRS duration and QT intervals, along with greater morphological variations in QRS and T waves, compared to cluster 2 (N=1,569). Cluster 1, relative to cluster 2, had a significantly higher risk of incident HF (hazard ratio [HR]:2.40, 95%-confidence interval [CI]:1.51-3.83), confirmed by independent validation (HR:1.77, CI:1.31-2.41). It also showed a higher association with prevalent HF (odds ratio:4.10, CI:2.02-8.29), independent of clinical risk factors.
Conclusions
Our approach identified a cluster of individuals with CAD sharing ECG characteristics indicating HF risk, holding significant implications for targeted treatment and prevention enabling accessible large-scale screening.
Q1

Comprehensive full-vessel segmentation and volumetric plaque quantification for intracoronary optical coherence tomography using deep learning
Volleberg R.H., van der Waerden R.G., Luttikholt T.J., van der Zande J.L., Cancian P., Gu X., Mol J., Quax S., Prokop M., Sánchez C.I., van Ginneken B., Išgum I., Thannhauser J., Saitta S., Nishimiya K., et. al.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Intracoronary optical coherence tomography (OCT) provides detailed information on coronary lesions, but interpretation of OCT images is time-consuming and subject to interobserver variability.
Objectives
To develop and validate a deep learning-based multiclass semantic segmentation algorithm for OCT (OCT-AID).
Methods
A reference standard was obtained through manual multiclass annotation (guidewire artefact, lumen, side branch, intima, media, lipid plaque, calcified plaque, thrombus, plaque rupture, and background) of OCT images from a representative subset of pullbacks from the PECTUS-obs study. Pullbacks were randomly divided into a training and internal test set. An additional independent dataset was used for external testing.
Results
In total, 2808 frames were used for training and 218 for internal testing. The external test set comprised 392 frames. On the internal test set, the mean Dice score across nine classes was 0.659 overall and 0.757 on the true-positive frames, ranging from 0.281 to 0.989 per class. Substantial to almost perfect agreement was achieved for frame-wise identification of both lipid (κ=0.817, 95% CI 0.743-0.891) and calcified plaques (κ=0.795, 95% CI 0.703-0.887). For plaque quantification (e.g. lipid arc, calcium thickness), intraclass correlations of 0.664-0.884 were achieved. In the external test set, κ-values for lipid and calcified plaques were 0.720 (95% CI 0.640-0.800) and 0.851 (95% CI 0.794-0.908), respectively.
Conclusions
The developed multiclass semantic segmentation method for intracoronary OCT images demonstrated promising capabilities for various classes, while having included difficult frames, such as those containing artefacts or destabilized plaques. This algorithm is an important step towards comprehensive and standardized OCT image interpretation.
Q1

Evaluation of real-world application of cardiac implantable electronic device-based multi-sensor algorithm for heart failure management
Llewellyn J., Goode R., Kahn M., Valsecchi S., Rao A.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Aims
Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices enables pre-emptive management of heart failure (HF) without additional patient engagement. The HeartLogic™ algorithm in implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) combines physiological parameters to predict HF events, facilitating earlier interventions. This study evaluated its diagnostic performance and resource implications within an HF management service.
Methods and results
In a single-centre study, 212 patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy ICDs (CRT-Ds) were monitored for 12-months. During follow-up, 18 (8%) patients died, and 15 HF hospitalizations occurred in 13 (6%) patients. Outpatient visits totalled 37 in 34 (16%) patients. HeartLogic™ alerts occurred in 58% of patients, with 100% sensitivity for HF-related hospitalizations. The positive predictive value was 29% including only alerts associated with HF events, while it was 51% including HF events and explained alerts. Unexplained alert rate was 0.46 per patient-year. Clinical interventions, mainly medication adjustments, followed 82 alerts. Total management time was 257 h/year, equivalent to 0.57 full-time equivalents for managing 1000 CRT-D patients.
Conclusion
The integration of HeartLogic™ into routine care demonstrated its utility in optimizing HF management, improving healthcare resource allocation. The algorithm can enhance proactive patient management and provide holistic care within the existing healthcare infrastructure.
Q1

Identifying Heart Failure Dynamics Using Multi-Point Electrocardiograms and Deep Learning
Nishihara Y., Nishimori M., Shibata S., Shinohara M., Hirata K., Tanaka H.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Aims
Heart failure (HF) hospitalizations are associated with poor survival outcomes, emphasizing the need for early intervention. Deep learning algorithms have shown promise in HF detection through electrocardiogram (ECG), However, their utility in ongoing HF monitoring remains uncertain. This study developed a deep learning model using 12-lead ECGs collected at two different time points to evaluate HF status changes, aiming to enhance early intervention and continuous monitoring in various healthcare settings.
Methods and Results
We analyzed 30,171 ECGs from 6,531 adult patients at Kobe University Hospital. The participants were randomly assigned to training, validation, and test datasets. A Transformer-based model was developed to classify HF status into deteriorated, improved, and no-change classes based on ECG waveform signals at two different time points. Performance metrics, such as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and accuracy, were calculated, and attention mapping via gradient-weighted class activation mapping was utilized to interpret the model's decision-making ability. The patients had an average age of 64.6 years (±15.4 years), brain natriuretic peptide of 66.3 pg/mL (24.6 to 175.1 pg/mL). For HF status classification, the model achieved an AUROC of 0.889 (95% CI: 0.879–0.898) and an accuracy of 0.871 (95% CI: 0.864–0.878).
Conclusions
Transformer-based deep learning model demonstrated high accuracy in detecting HF status changes, highlighting its potential as a non-invasive, efficient tool for HF monitoring. The reliance of the model on ECGs reduces the need for invasive, costly diagnostics, aligning with clinical needs for accessible HF management.
Q1

Eco-Conscious Healthcare: Merging Clinical Efficacy with Sustainability
Scholte N.T., van der Boon R.M.
Q1

Examination of the performance of machine learning-based automated coronary plaque characterization by NIRS-IVUS and OCT with histology
Bajaj R., Parasa R., Broersen A., Johnson T., Garg M., Prati F., Çap M., Lecaros Yap N.A., Karaduman M., Busk C.A., Grainger S., White S., Mathur A., García-García H.M., Dijkstra J., et. al.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Aims
Near-infrared spectroscopy-intravascular ultrasound (NIRS-IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) can assess coronary plaque pathology but are limited by time-consuming and expertise-driven image analysis. Recently introduced machine learning(ML)-classifiers have expedited image processing, but their performance in assessing plaque pathology against histological standards remains unclear. The aim of this study is to assess the performance of NIRS-IVUS-ML-based and OCT-ML-based plaque characterization against a histological standard.
Methods and Results
Matched histological and NIRS-IVUS/OCT frames from human cadaveric hearts were manually annotated and fibrotic(FT), calcific(Ca) and necrotic core(NC) regions-of-interest(ROIs) were identified. NIRS-IVUS and OCT frames were processed by their respective ML-classifiers to segment and characterize plaque components. The histologically-defined ROIs were overlaid onto corresponding NIRS-IVUS/OCT frames and the ML-classifier estimations compared with histology.
In total 131 pairs of NIRS-IVUS/histology and 184 pairs of OCT/histology were included. The agreement of NIRS-IVUS-ML with histology (concordance correlation coefficient(CCC) 0.81 and 0.88) was superior to OCT-ML (CCC 0.64 and 0.73) for the plaque area and burden. Plaque compositional analysis showed a substantial agreement of the NIRS-IVUS-ML with histology for FT, Ca and NC ROIs (CCC: 0.73, 0.75 and 0.66, respectively) while the agreement of the OCT-ML with histology was 0.42, 0.62 and 0.13, respectively. The overall accuracy of NIRS-IVUS-ML and OCT-ML for characterizing atheroma types was 83% and 72%, respectively.
Conclusions
NIRS-IVUS-ML plaque compositional analysis has a good performance in assessing plaque components while OCT-ML performs well for the FT, moderately for the Ca and has weak performance in detecting NC tissue. This may be attributable to limitations of standalone intravascular imaging and to the fact that the OCT-ML classifier was trained on human experts rather than histological standards.
Q1

Feasibility, safety and patient perceptions of exercise-based cardiac telerehabilitation in a multicentre real-world setting after myocardial infarction – the Remote Exercise SWEDEHEART study
Bäck M., Leosdottir M., Ekström M., Hambraeus K., Ravn-Fischer A., Borg S., Brosved M., Flink M., Hedin K., Lans C., Olovsson J., Urell C., Öberg B., James S.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Cardiac telerehabilitation addresses common barriers for attendance at exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (EBCR). Pragmatic real-world studies are however lacking, limiting generalisability of available evidence. We aimed to evaluate feasibility, safety, and patient perceptions of remotely delivered EBCR in a multicentre clinical practice setting after myocardial infarction (MI).
Methods
This study included 232 post-MI patients (63.7 years, 77.5% men) from 23 cardiac rehabilitation centres in Sweden (2020-2022). Exercise was delivered twice per week for three months through a real-time group-based video meeting connecting a physiotherapist to patients exercising at home. Outcomes were assessed before and after remote EBCR completion and comprised assessment of physical fitness, self-reported physical activity and exercise, physical capacity, kinesiophobia, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), self-efficacy for exercise, exercise adherence, patient acceptance. Safety monitoring in terms of adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE) was recorded.
Results
A total of 67.2% of the patients attended ≥ 75% of prescribed exercise sessions. Significant improvements in physical fitness, self-reported exercise, physical capacity, kinesiophobia, and HRQoL were observed. Patients agreed that remote EBCR improved health care access (83%), was easy to use (94%) and found exercise performance and interaction acceptable (95%). Sixteen exercise-related AEs (most commonly dizziness and musculoskeletal symptoms) were registered, all of which were resolved. Two SAEs requiring hospitalization were reported, both unrelated to exercise.
Conclusions
This multicentre study supports remote EBCR post-MI as feasible and safe with a high patient acceptance in a real-world setting. The clinical effectiveness needs to be confirmed in a randomised controlled trial.
Trial registration number
NCT04260958.
Q1

The environmental impact of telemonitoring versus on-site cardiac follow-up: a mixed-method study
van Bree E.M., Snijder L.E., ter Haak S., Atsma D.E., Brakema E.A.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Aims
Digital health technologies are considered promising innovations to reduce healthcare’s environmental footprint. However, this assumption remains largely unstudied. We compared the environmental impact of telemonitoring and care on site (CoS) in post-myocardial infarction (MI) follow-up and explored how it influenced patients’ and healthcare professionals’ (HPs) perceptions of using telemonitoring.
Methods
We conducted a mixed-method study; a standardised life cycle assessment and qualitative interviews and focus groups. We studied the environmental impact of resource use per patient for one-year post-MI follow-up in a Dutch academic hospital, as CoS or partially via telemonitoring. We used the Environmental Footprint 3.1 method. Qualitative data were analysed using Thematic Analysis.
Results
The environmental impact of telemonitoring was larger than CoS for all impact categories, including global warming (+480%) and mineral/metal resource use (+4,390%). Production of telemonitoring devices contributed most of the environmental burden (89%). Telemonitoring and CoS achieved parity in most impact categories at 65 km one-way patient car commute. HPs and patients did not consider the environmental impact in their preference for telemonitoring, as the patient’s individual health was their primary concern – especially after a cardiac event. However, patients and HPs were generally positive towards sustainable healthcare and willing to use telemonitoring more sustainably.
Conclusion
Telemonitoring had a substantially bigger environmental impact than CoS in the studied setting. Patient commute distance, reuse of devices, and tailored use of devices should be considered when implementing telemonitoring for clinical follow-up. Patients and HPs supported these solutions to enhance sustainability-informed cardiovascular care as the default option.
Q1

Sudden cardiac arrest prediction via deep learning electrocardiogram analysis
Oberdier M.T., Neri L., Orro A., Carrick R.T., Nobile M.S., Jaipalli S., Khan M., Diciotti S., Borghi C., Halperin H.R.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Aims
Sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) is a commonly fatal event that often occurs without prior indications. To improve outcomes and enable preventative strategies, the electrocardiogram (ECG) in conjunction with deep learning was explored as a potential screening tool.
Methods and results
A publicly available data set containing 10 s of 12-lead ECGs from individuals who did and did not have an SCA, information about time from ECG to arrest, and age and sex was utilized for analysis to individually predict SCA or not using deep convolution neural network models. The base model that included age and sex, ECGs within 1 day prior to arrest, and data sampled from windows of 720 ms around the R-waves from 221 individuals with SCA and 1046 controls had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.77. With sensitivity set at 95%, base model specificity was 31%, which is not clinically applicable. Gradient-weighted class activation mapping showed that the model mostly relied on the QRS complex to make predictions. However, models with ECGs recorded between 1 day to 1 month and 1 month to 1 year prior to arrest demonstrated predictive capabilities.
Conclusion
Deep learning models processing ECG data are a promising means of screening for SCA, and this method explains differences in SCAs due to age and sex. Model performance improved when ECGs were nearer in time to SCAs, although ECG data up to a year prior had predictive value. Sudden cardiac arrest prediction was more dependent upon QRS complex data compared to other ECG segments.
Q1

Siamese neural network-enhanced electrocardiography can re-identify anonymised healthcare data
Macierzanka K., Sau A., Patlatzoglou K., Pastika L., Sieliwonczyk E., Gurnani M., Peters N.S., Waks J.W., Kramer D.B., Ng F.S.
Q1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
,
PDF
|
Abstract
Abstract
Aims
Many research databases with anonymised patient data contain electrocardiograms (ECGs) from which traditional identifiers have been removed. We evaluated the ability of artificial intelligence (AI) methods to determine the similarity between ECGs and assessed whether they have the potential to be misused to re-identify individuals from anonymised datasets.
Methods and results
We utilised a convolutional Siamese neural network (SNN) architecture, which derives a Euclidean distance similarity metric between two input ECGs. A secondary care dataset of 864,283 ECGs (72,455 subjects) was used. SNN-ECG achieves an accuracy of 91.68% when classifying between 2,689,124 same-subject pairs and 2,689,124 different-subject pairs. This performance increases to 93.61% and 95.97% in outpatient and normal ECG subsets. In a simulated ‘motivated intruder’ test, SNN-ECG can identify individuals from large datasets. In datasets of 100, 1,000, 10,000 and 20,000 ECGs, where only one ECG is also from the reference individual, it achieves success rates of 79.2%, 62.6%, 45.0% and 40.0%, respectively. If this was random, the success would be 1%, 0.1%, 0.01% and 0.005%, respectively. Additional basic information, like subject sex or age-range, enhances performance further. We also found that, on the subject level, ECG pair similarity is clinically relevant; greater ECG dissimilarity associates with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.22 (1.21-1.23), p < 0.0001) and is additive to an AI-ECG model trained for mortality prediction.
Conclusion
Anonymised ECGs retain information that may facilitate subject re-identification, raising privacy and data protection concerns. However, SNN-ECG models also have positive uses and can enhance risk prediction of cardiovascular disease.
Top-100
Citing journals
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
|
|
International Journal of Circumpolar Health
2191 citations, 12.32%
|
|
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
510 citations, 2.87%
|
|
BMC Public Health
259 citations, 1.46%
|
|
PLoS ONE
258 citations, 1.45%
|
|
Science of the Total Environment
162 citations, 0.91%
|
|
Public Health Nutrition
152 citations, 0.85%
|
|
BMJ Open
126 citations, 0.71%
|
|
Canadian Journal of Public Health
125 citations, 0.7%
|
|
Environmental Research
118 citations, 0.66%
|
|
Scandinavian Journal of Public Health
112 citations, 0.63%
|
|
Social Science and Medicine
103 citations, 0.58%
|
|
Nutrients
100 citations, 0.56%
|
|
BMC Health Services Research
90 citations, 0.51%
|
|
American Journal of Human Biology
86 citations, 0.48%
|
|
Frontiers in Public Health
81 citations, 0.46%
|
|
Scientific Reports
80 citations, 0.45%
|
|
Sustainability
77 citations, 0.43%
|
|
Environmental International
76 citations, 0.43%
|
|
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
75 citations, 0.42%
|
|
Journal of Nutrition
72 citations, 0.4%
|
|
Ekologiya Cheloveka (Human Ecology)
68 citations, 0.38%
|
|
BMJ Global Health
50 citations, 0.28%
|
|
Global Health Action
47 citations, 0.26%
|
|
AlterNative
45 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics
43 citations, 0.24%
|
|
Current Developments in Nutrition
43 citations, 0.24%
|
|
American Journal of Public Health
42 citations, 0.24%
|
|
Environmental Health Perspectives
42 citations, 0.24%
|
|
International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health
41 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Applied Physiology, Nutrition and Metabolism
41 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Health and Place
41 citations, 0.23%
|
|
International Journal of Biometeorology
39 citations, 0.22%
|
|
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
39 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Public Health
38 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Transcultural Psychiatry
38 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Canadian Journal of Diabetes
37 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice
36 citations, 0.2%
|
|
International Journal for Equity in Health
36 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare
36 citations, 0.2%
|
|
British Journal of Nutrition
36 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Journal of Community Health
35 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Environmental Research Letters
35 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Paediatrics and Child Health
35 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Elementa
35 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Nutrition Reviews
34 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Chemosphere
34 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Annual Review of Anthropology
34 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Vaccine
33 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Qualitative Health Research
33 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Canadian Journal of Cardiology
32 citations, 0.18%
|
|
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
32 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Telemedicine Journal and e-Health
31 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Arctic Science
31 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Environmental Pollution
31 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Environmental Health: A Global Access Science Source
30 citations, 0.17%
|
|
European Journal of Applied Physiology
30 citations, 0.17%
|
|
International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health
29 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Polar Record
28 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Wilderness and Environmental Medicine
27 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Climatic Change
27 citations, 0.15%
|
|
The International Journal of Qualitative Methods
26 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal
26 citations, 0.15%
|
|
European Journal of Public Health
26 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Journal of Thermal Biology
26 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Atherosclerosis
26 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Journal of Medical Internet Research
26 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Polar Geography
25 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Regional Environmental Change
25 citations, 0.14%
|
|
The Lancet
25 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Children
25 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Journal of Cancer Education
24 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Healthcare
24 citations, 0.13%
|
|
American Journal of Community Psychology
24 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Industrial Health
24 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Journal of Clinical Medicine
24 citations, 0.13%
|
|
EcoHealth
23 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Health Promotion Practice
23 citations, 0.13%
|
|
BMC Oral Health
23 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Frontiers in Physiology
23 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Ambio
22 citations, 0.12%
|
|
The Lancet Oncology
22 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Nordic Journal of Psychiatry
22 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Environmental Science and Policy
22 citations, 0.12%
|
|
BMC Psychiatry
22 citations, 0.12%
|
|
EClinicalMedicine
22 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Facets
22 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Canadian Journal of Respiratory Critical Care and Sleep Medicine
22 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Gigiena i sanitariia
20 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Frontiers in Psychiatry
20 citations, 0.11%
|
|
SSM - Population Health
20 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada
20 citations, 0.11%
|
|
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
20 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Canadian Geographer / Geographie Canadien
20 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
20 citations, 0.11%
|
|
CMAJ Open
20 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Frontiers in Psychology
19 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases
19 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Pediatrics
19 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care
18 citations, 0.1%
|
|
BMC Pediatrics
18 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
|
Citing publishers
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
|
|
Taylor & Francis
3258 citations, 18.32%
|
|
Elsevier
3000 citations, 16.87%
|
|
Springer Nature
2649 citations, 14.9%
|
|
Wiley
1283 citations, 7.22%
|
|
MDPI
1140 citations, 6.41%
|
|
SAGE
810 citations, 4.56%
|
|
Cambridge University Press
407 citations, 2.29%
|
|
Oxford University Press
386 citations, 2.17%
|
|
Frontiers Media S.A.
350 citations, 1.97%
|
|
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
297 citations, 1.67%
|
|
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
291 citations, 1.64%
|
|
BMJ
273 citations, 1.54%
|
|
Canadian Science Publishing
121 citations, 0.68%
|
|
American Society for Nutrition
120 citations, 0.67%
|
|
Mary Ann Liebert
98 citations, 0.55%
|
|
JMIR Publications
98 citations, 0.55%
|
|
Eco-Vector LLC
85 citations, 0.48%
|
|
Hindawi Limited
75 citations, 0.42%
|
|
Emerald
56 citations, 0.31%
|
|
IOP Publishing
55 citations, 0.31%
|
|
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
55 citations, 0.31%
|
|
Annual Reviews
53 citations, 0.3%
|
|
Consortium Erudit
52 citations, 0.29%
|
|
SciELO
49 citations, 0.28%
|
|
Walter de Gruyter
44 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Environmental Health Perspectives
44 citations, 0.25%
|
|
American Public Health Association
42 citations, 0.24%
|
|
IGI Global
42 citations, 0.24%
|
|
Research Square Platform LLC
40 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
38 citations, 0.21%
|
|
University of California Press
37 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
37 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Pleiades Publishing
36 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Scandinavian University Press / Universitetsforlaget AS
35 citations, 0.2%
|
|
American Society for Microbiology
33 citations, 0.19%
|
|
American Physiological Society
32 citations, 0.18%
|
|
American Chemical Society (ACS)
27 citations, 0.15%
|
|
National Institute of Industrial Health
27 citations, 0.15%
|
|
CMA Impact Inc.
26 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Federal Scientific Center for Hygiene F.F.Erisman
23 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
22 citations, 0.12%
|
|
American Diabetes Association
21 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
21 citations, 0.12%
|
|
IWA Publishing
21 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Baishideng Publishing Group
21 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Dietitians of Canada
20 citations, 0.11%
|
|
American Academy of Pediatrics
19 citations, 0.11%
|
|
American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
17 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Medknow
17 citations, 0.1%
|
|
CSIRO Publishing
17 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Media Sphere Publishing House
17 citations, 0.1%
|
|
IOS Press
16 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Masaryk University Press
16 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Mark Allen Group
16 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Social Science Electronic Publishing
16 citations, 0.09%
|
|
15 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Federal Center for Hygiene and Epidemiology
15 citations, 0.08%
|
|
American Medical Association (AMA)
14 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Technosdar Ltd
14 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Hogrefe Publishing Group
14 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
13 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
13 citations, 0.07%
|
|
S. Karger AG
13 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Norwegian Polar Institute
12 citations, 0.07%
|
|
PeerJ
12 citations, 0.07%
|
|
University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress)
12 citations, 0.07%
|
|
IntechOpen
12 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Western University
11 citations, 0.06%
|
|
11 citations, 0.06%
|
|
EDP Sciences
10 citations, 0.06%
|
|
American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
10 citations, 0.06%
|
|
F1000 Research
10 citations, 0.06%
|
|
Microbiology Society
9 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Spandidos Publications
9 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Scientific Research Publishing
9 citations, 0.05%
|
|
American Meteorological Society
8 citations, 0.04%
|
|
AME Publishing Company
8 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishing
8 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Human Kinetics
8 citations, 0.04%
|
|
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
7 citations, 0.04%
|
|
The Royal Society
7 citations, 0.04%
|
|
7 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Saint Petersburg Pasteur Institute
7 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Swedish Nutrition Foundation
7 citations, 0.04%
|
|
PAGEPress Publications
7 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
AIP Publishing
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
University of Chicago Press
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Associacao Brasileira de Enfermagem
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
European Respiratory Society (ERS)
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS)
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Wilfrid Laurier University Press
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Maad Rayan Publishing Company
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
OAE Publishing Inc.
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Far Eastern Scientific Center Of Physiology and Pathology of Respiration
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
PANORAMA Publishing House
6 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
5 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
|
Publishing organizations
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
|
|
UiT The Arctic University of Norway
169 publications, 9.62%
|
|
University of Greenland
95 publications, 5.41%
|
|
University of Oulu
87 publications, 4.95%
|
|
University of Manitoba
70 publications, 3.98%
|
|
University of Southern Denmark
69 publications, 3.93%
|
|
McGill University
63 publications, 3.59%
|
|
University of Toronto
58 publications, 3.3%
|
|
Umeå University
55 publications, 3.13%
|
|
University of Alberta
55 publications, 3.13%
|
|
University of Copenhagen
54 publications, 3.07%
|
|
Aarhus University
48 publications, 2.73%
|
|
Oulu University Hospital
44 publications, 2.5%
|
|
Université Laval
38 publications, 2.16%
|
|
University Hospital of North Norway
36 publications, 2.05%
|
|
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec
33 publications, 1.88%
|
|
University of British Columbia
29 publications, 1.65%
|
|
Steno Diabetes Center
26 publications, 1.48%
|
|
University of Ottawa
26 publications, 1.48%
|
|
University of Saskatchewan
25 publications, 1.42%
|
|
University of Helsinki
23 publications, 1.31%
|
|
Northern State Medical University
21 publications, 1.2%
|
|
Statens Serum Institut
21 publications, 1.2%
|
|
McMaster University
21 publications, 1.2%
|
|
Copenhagen University Hospital
19 publications, 1.08%
|
|
Aalborg University Hospital
18 publications, 1.02%
|
|
Aarhus University Hospital
18 publications, 1.02%
|
|
Norwegian Institute of Public Health
18 publications, 1.02%
|
|
University of Iceland
18 publications, 1.02%
|
|
Danish National Institute of Public Health
17 publications, 0.97%
|
|
University of Washington
17 publications, 0.97%
|
|
Public Health Agency of Canada
17 publications, 0.97%
|
|
University of Waterloo
16 publications, 0.91%
|
|
Norwegian University of Science and Technology
15 publications, 0.85%
|
|
North-Eastern Federal University
14 publications, 0.8%
|
|
Mid Sweden University
14 publications, 0.8%
|
|
Helsinki University Hospital
13 publications, 0.74%
|
|
Yakut science centre of complex medical problems
12 publications, 0.68%
|
|
Tampere University
12 publications, 0.68%
|
|
University of Bergen
12 publications, 0.68%
|
|
University of Gothenburg
11 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Lulea University of Technology
11 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Aalborg University
11 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Western University
11 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
10 publications, 0.57%
|
|
Karolinska Institute
9 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Tampere University Hospital
9 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of Guelph
9 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of Northern British Columbia
9 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of Oslo
8 publications, 0.46%
|
|
Dalhousie University
8 publications, 0.46%
|
|
Trent University
8 publications, 0.46%
|
|
University of Calgary
8 publications, 0.46%
|
|
National Research University Higher School of Economics
7 publications, 0.4%
|
|
Kola Science Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences
7 publications, 0.4%
|
|
Scientific Research Institute of Neurosciences and Medicine
7 publications, 0.4%
|
|
University of Eastern Finland
7 publications, 0.4%
|
|
Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare
7 publications, 0.4%
|
|
McGill University Health Centre
7 publications, 0.4%
|
|
Lund University
6 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Gävle
6 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Folkhalsan Research Centre
6 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Finnish Institute of Occupational Health
6 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Akureyri
6 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Mayo Clinic
6 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Victoria
6 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Lakehead University
6 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Institute of Internal and Preventive Medicine ICG of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
5 publications, 0.28%
|
|
Nord University
5 publications, 0.28%
|
|
University of Jyväskylä
5 publications, 0.28%
|
|
Kuopio University Hospital
5 publications, 0.28%
|
|
Novo Nordisk
5 publications, 0.28%
|
|
Odense University Hospital
5 publications, 0.28%
|
|
National University Hospital of Iceland
5 publications, 0.28%
|
|
University of California, San Francisco
5 publications, 0.28%
|
|
Queen's University at Kingston
5 publications, 0.28%
|
|
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
5 publications, 0.28%
|
|
Al Farabi Kazakh National University
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
University Hospital of Umeå
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Oslo University Hospital
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Cornell University
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Norwegian Institute for Air Research
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Howard University
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Washington State University
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Harvard University
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Goethe University Frankfurt
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
York University
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Toronto Metropolitan University
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Montreal Children's Hospital
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre
4 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Lomonosov Moscow State University
3 publications, 0.17%
|
|
University of Sharjah
3 publications, 0.17%
|
|
Uppsala University
3 publications, 0.17%
|
|
Karolinska University Hospital
3 publications, 0.17%
|
|
Aalto University
3 publications, 0.17%
|
|
University of Skövde
3 publications, 0.17%
|
|
Oslo Metropolitan University
3 publications, 0.17%
|
|
Zealand University Hospital Køge
3 publications, 0.17%
|
|
Roskilde University
3 publications, 0.17%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
|
Publishing organizations in 5 years
10
20
30
40
50
60
|
|
University of Greenland
51 publications, 13.49%
|
|
UiT The Arctic University of Norway
40 publications, 10.58%
|
|
University of Southern Denmark
29 publications, 7.67%
|
|
Aarhus University
22 publications, 5.82%
|
|
Umeå University
21 publications, 5.56%
|
|
University of Manitoba
21 publications, 5.56%
|
|
University of Copenhagen
17 publications, 4.5%
|
|
University of Oulu
16 publications, 4.23%
|
|
Aarhus University Hospital
15 publications, 3.97%
|
|
Steno Diabetes Center
15 publications, 3.97%
|
|
University of Iceland
13 publications, 3.44%
|
|
University of Saskatchewan
13 publications, 3.44%
|
|
Aalborg University Hospital
12 publications, 3.17%
|
|
Université Laval
11 publications, 2.91%
|
|
University of Alberta
11 publications, 2.91%
|
|
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec
11 publications, 2.91%
|
|
University of Toronto
10 publications, 2.65%
|
|
Copenhagen University Hospital
9 publications, 2.38%
|
|
Aalborg University
8 publications, 2.12%
|
|
University Hospital of North Norway
8 publications, 2.12%
|
|
University of Waterloo
8 publications, 2.12%
|
|
Norwegian University of Science and Technology
7 publications, 1.85%
|
|
University of British Columbia
7 publications, 1.85%
|
|
University of Ottawa
7 publications, 1.85%
|
|
National Research University Higher School of Economics
6 publications, 1.59%
|
|
University of Helsinki
6 publications, 1.59%
|
|
Mid Sweden University
6 publications, 1.59%
|
|
Oulu University Hospital
5 publications, 1.32%
|
|
University of Washington
5 publications, 1.32%
|
|
McMaster University
5 publications, 1.32%
|
|
Public Health Agency of Canada
5 publications, 1.32%
|
|
National University Hospital of Iceland
4 publications, 1.06%
|
|
University of Akureyri
4 publications, 1.06%
|
|
McGill University
4 publications, 1.06%
|
|
York University
4 publications, 1.06%
|
|
North-Eastern Federal University
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
Al Farabi Kazakh National University
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
Northern State Medical University
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
University of Sharjah
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
Helsinki University Hospital
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
Lulea University of Technology
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
University of Eastern Finland
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
Nord University
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
University of Jyväskylä
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
Novo Nordisk
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
Washington State University
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
Oregon Health & Science University
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
University of Victoria
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
University of Calgary
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
3 publications, 0.79%
|
|
Lomonosov Moscow State University
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
University of Tyumen
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Northern (Arctic) Federal University
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Yakut science centre of complex medical problems
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Karolinska Institute
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Tampere University Hospital
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Tampere University
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
University College London
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
University of Oslo
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Oslo Metropolitan University
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Odense University Hospital
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Zealand University Hospital Køge
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Norwegian Institute of Public Health
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Pennsylvania State University
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Vrije Universiteit Brussel
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
McGill University Health Centre
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Trent University
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Environment and Climate Change Canada
2 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Institute of Cytology and Genetics of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Institute for Biological Problems of Cryolithozone of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Saint Petersburg State University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Novosibirsk State Medical University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Smorodintsev Research Institute of Influenza
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Research Centre for Medical Genetics
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Saint-Petersburg Research Institute of Phthisiopulmonology
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
North-Western State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Kemerovo State Medical University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Institute of Internal and Preventive Medicine ICG of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Astana Medical University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Saint-Petersburg Research Institute of Radiation Hygiene named after Professor P.V. Ramzaev
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Bar-Ilan University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Tongji University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Aix-Marseille University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Lund University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Karolinska University Hospital
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
University of Gothenburg
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Örebro University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Halmstad University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
University Hospital of Zürich
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
University of Zurich
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
University of Skövde
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Dalarna University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Western Sydney University
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
University of Milan
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Turku University Hospital
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
University of Turin
1 publication, 0.26%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
10
20
30
40
50
60
|
Publishing countries
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
|
|
Canada
|
Canada, 488, 27.77%
Canada
488 publications, 27.77%
|
USA
|
USA, 323, 18.38%
USA
323 publications, 18.38%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 244, 13.89%
Denmark
244 publications, 13.89%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 222, 12.64%
Norway
222 publications, 12.64%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 184, 10.47%
Finland
184 publications, 10.47%
|
Greenland
|
Greenland, 177, 10.07%
Greenland
177 publications, 10.07%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 129, 7.34%
Sweden
129 publications, 7.34%
|
Russia
|
Russia, 106, 6.03%
Russia
106 publications, 6.03%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 26, 1.48%
United Kingdom
26 publications, 1.48%
|
Iceland
|
Iceland, 20, 1.14%
Iceland
20 publications, 1.14%
|
France
|
France, 14, 0.8%
France
14 publications, 0.8%
|
Faroe Islands
|
Faroe Islands, 14, 0.8%
Faroe Islands
14 publications, 0.8%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 12, 0.68%
Germany
12 publications, 0.68%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 11, 0.63%
Australia
11 publications, 0.63%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 7, 0.4%
Belgium
7 publications, 0.4%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 7, 0.4%
Italy
7 publications, 0.4%
|
Kazakhstan
|
Kazakhstan, 6, 0.34%
Kazakhstan
6 publications, 0.34%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 6, 0.34%
Netherlands
6 publications, 0.34%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 6, 0.34%
Switzerland
6 publications, 0.34%
|
UAE
|
UAE, 5, 0.28%
UAE
5 publications, 0.28%
|
China
|
China, 4, 0.23%
China
4 publications, 0.23%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 4, 0.23%
New Zealand
4 publications, 0.23%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 4, 0.23%
Japan
4 publications, 0.23%
|
Bulgaria
|
Bulgaria, 3, 0.17%
Bulgaria
3 publications, 0.17%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 3, 0.17%
Israel
3 publications, 0.17%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 3, 0.17%
Spain
3 publications, 0.17%
|
Egypt
|
Egypt, 2, 0.11%
Egypt
2 publications, 0.11%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 2, 0.11%
Ireland
2 publications, 0.11%
|
Lithuania
|
Lithuania, 2, 0.11%
Lithuania
2 publications, 0.11%
|
Singapore
|
Singapore, 2, 0.11%
Singapore
2 publications, 0.11%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 2, 0.11%
Turkey
2 publications, 0.11%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 2, 0.11%
Chile
2 publications, 0.11%
|
South Africa
|
South Africa, 2, 0.11%
South Africa
2 publications, 0.11%
|
Argentina
|
Argentina, 1, 0.06%
Argentina
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 1, 0.06%
Brazil
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Dominican Republic
|
Dominican Republic, 1, 0.06%
Dominican Republic
1 publication, 0.06%
|
India
|
India, 1, 0.06%
India
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Iran
|
Iran, 1, 0.06%
Iran
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Kenya
|
Kenya, 1, 0.06%
Kenya
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Lebanon
|
Lebanon, 1, 0.06%
Lebanon
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Nigeria
|
Nigeria, 1, 0.06%
Nigeria
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Palestine
|
Palestine, 1, 0.06%
Palestine
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Poland
|
Poland, 1, 0.06%
Poland
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Slovenia
|
Slovenia, 1, 0.06%
Slovenia
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Show all (14 more) | |
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
|
Publishing countries in 5 years
20
40
60
80
100
120
|
|
Canada
|
Canada, 113, 29.89%
Canada
113 publications, 29.89%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 79, 20.9%
Denmark
79 publications, 20.9%
|
Greenland
|
Greenland, 66, 17.46%
Greenland
66 publications, 17.46%
|
USA
|
USA, 64, 16.93%
USA
64 publications, 16.93%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 50, 13.23%
Norway
50 publications, 13.23%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 36, 9.52%
Sweden
36 publications, 9.52%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 28, 7.41%
Finland
28 publications, 7.41%
|
Russia
|
Russia, 15, 3.97%
Russia
15 publications, 3.97%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 14, 3.7%
United Kingdom
14 publications, 3.7%
|
Iceland
|
Iceland, 12, 3.17%
Iceland
12 publications, 3.17%
|
Faroe Islands
|
Faroe Islands, 6, 1.59%
Faroe Islands
6 publications, 1.59%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 4, 1.06%
Australia
4 publications, 1.06%
|
UAE
|
UAE, 4, 1.06%
UAE
4 publications, 1.06%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 3, 0.79%
Germany
3 publications, 0.79%
|
France
|
France, 3, 0.79%
France
3 publications, 0.79%
|
Kazakhstan
|
Kazakhstan, 3, 0.79%
Kazakhstan
3 publications, 0.79%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 2, 0.53%
Belgium
2 publications, 0.53%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 2, 0.53%
Israel
2 publications, 0.53%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 2, 0.53%
Italy
2 publications, 0.53%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 2, 0.53%
Netherlands
2 publications, 0.53%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 2, 0.53%
New Zealand
2 publications, 0.53%
|
China
|
China, 1, 0.26%
China
1 publication, 0.26%
|
Poland
|
Poland, 1, 0.26%
Poland
1 publication, 0.26%
|
Slovenia
|
Slovenia, 1, 0.26%
Slovenia
1 publication, 0.26%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 1, 0.26%
Chile
1 publication, 0.26%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 1, 0.26%
Switzerland
1 publication, 0.26%
|
South Africa
|
South Africa, 1, 0.26%
South Africa
1 publication, 0.26%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 1, 0.26%
Japan
1 publication, 0.26%
|
20
40
60
80
100
120
|