Title |
Patient-reported health as a prognostic factor for adverse events following percutaneous coronary intervention
|
---|---|
Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, January 2014
|
DOI | 10.2147/clep.s54237 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Karin Biering, Hans Erik Bøtker, Troels Niemann, Niels Henrik Hjollund |
Abstract |
A relation may exist between self-reported health and adverse events in coronary heart disease. Previous studies have been vulnerable to possible selection bias. In the study reported here, we examined the association between self-rated health and adverse events in terms of cardiac events, cardiac readmissions, and all-cause mortality in a complete cohort of patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Finland | 1 | 7% |
Unknown | 14 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 4 | 27% |
Student > Bachelor | 3 | 20% |
Student > Master | 3 | 20% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 13% |
Other | 1 | 7% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 2 | 13% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 20% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 13% |
Psychology | 2 | 13% |
Arts and Humanities | 1 | 7% |
Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 7% |
Other | 2 | 13% |
Unknown | 4 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 January 2014.
All research outputs
#18,361,534
of 22,741,406 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#565
of 711 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,330
of 305,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#8
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,741,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 711 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 305,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.