| Title |
Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Expert Panel Report Current Controversies and Implications for Clinical Trials
|
|---|---|
| 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. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 128 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 States | 40 | 31% |
| Spain | 14 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 7 | 5% |
| Colombia | 6 | 5% |
| Mexico | 3 | 2% |
| Ecuador | 2 | 2% |
| Argentina | 2 | 2% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Unknown | 46 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 81 | 63% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 20 | 16% |
| Scientists | 19 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 8 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 159 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 23 | 14% |
| Other | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 38 | 24% |
| Unknown | 46 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 68 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 6% |
| Engineering | 7 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 9% |
| Unknown | 52 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 74. 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 27 May 2020.
All research outputs
#576,662
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Heart Failure
#151
of 1,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,360
of 341,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Heart Failure
#7
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,583 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 341,886 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 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.