↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Atrial fibrillation and thromboprophylaxis in heart failure: the need for patient-centered approaches to address adherence

Overview of attention for article published in Vascular Health and Risk Management, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
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, Inglis, Newton, Sandy Middleton, Davidson, Macdonald, Ferguson C, Inglis SC, Newton PJ, Middleton S, Macdonald PS, Davidson PM

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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 99 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 95 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 24 24%
Unknown 9 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 19%
Psychology 9 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 13 13%

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
#2,211,715
of 16,587,222 outputs
Outputs from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#72
of 631 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,951
of 255,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#4
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,587,222 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 631 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 255,358 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 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.