| Title |
Atrial fibrillation and thromboprophylaxis in heart failure: the need for patient-centered approaches to address adherence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Vascular Health and Risk Management, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/vhrm.s39571 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Caleb Ferguson, Sally C Inglis, Phillip J Newton, Sandy Middleton, Peter S Macdonald, Patricia M Davidson |
| Abstract |
Atrial fibrillation is a common arrhythmia in heart failure and a risk factor for stroke. Risk assessment tools can assist clinicians with decision making in the allocation of thromboprophylaxis. This review provides an overview of current validated risk assessment tools for atrial fibrillation and emphasizes the importance of tailoring individual risk and the importance of weighing the benefits of treatment. Further, this review provides details of innovative and patient-centered methods for ensuring optimal adherence to prescribed therapy. Prior to initiating oral anticoagulant therapy, a comprehensive risk assessment should include evaluation of associated cardiogeriatric conditions, potential for adherence to prescribed therapy, frailty, and functional and cognitive ability. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 4 | 27% |
| United States | 2 | 13% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 7% |
| Norway | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 53% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 27% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| Slovenia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 115 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 23 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 7% |
| Professor | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 29 | 24% |
| Unknown | 20 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 16% |
| Psychology | 9 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 24 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 03 February 2015.
All research outputs
#3,661,761
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#114
of 785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,642
of 289,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 785 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 289,948 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
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.