↓ Skip to main content

American College of Cardiology

Article Metrics

Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Expert Panel Report

Overview of attention for article published in JACC: Heart Failure, August 2018
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 (#40 of 734)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
135 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Expert Panel Report
Published in
JACC: Heart Failure, August 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.jchf.2018.06.008
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kishan S. Parikh, Kavita Sharma, Mona Fiuzat, Howard K. Surks, Jyothis T. George, Narimon Honarpour, Christopher Depre, Patrice Desvigne-Nickens, Richard Nkulikiyinka, Gregory D. Lewis, Mardi Gomberg-Maitland, Christopher M. O’Connor, Norman Stockbridge, Robert M. Califf, Marvin A. Konstam, James L. Januzzi, Scott D. Solomon, Barry A. Borlaug, Sanjiv J. Shah, Margaret M. Redfield, G. Michael Felker

Abstract

The number of persons with heart failure has continued to rise over the last several years. Approximately one-half of those living with heart failure have heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, but critical unsolved questions remain across the spectrum of basic, translational, clinical, and population research in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. In this study, the authors summarize existing knowledge, persistent controversies, and gaps in evidence with regard to the understanding of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Our analysis is based on an expert panel discussion "Think Tank" meeting that included representatives from academia, the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and industry.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 135 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 33%
Other 5 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Unspecified 2 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Other 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 71%
Unspecified 5 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 79. 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 01 October 2018.
All research outputs
#180,441
of 12,383,019 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Heart Failure
#40
of 734 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,597
of 269,008 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Heart Failure
#2
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,383,019 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 734 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 269,008 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 96% 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.