↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Ankle Brachial Pressure Index (ABPI): An update for practitioners

Overview of attention for article published in Vascular Health and Risk Management, September 2009
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 (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
patent
2 patents
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
146 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
260 Mendeley
Title
Ankle Brachial Pressure Index (ABPI): An update for practitioners
Published in
Vascular Health and Risk Management, September 2009
DOI 10.2147/vhrm.s6759
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mo Al-Qaisi

Abstract

Peripheral vascular disease affects some 12%-14% of the general population, and the majority of people with the disease are asymptomatic. The ankle brachial pressure index (ABPI) test is widely used by a diverse range of practitioners (in the community and hospital setting) in order to screen asymptomatic patients, diagnose patients with clinical symptoms, and to monitor patients who have had radiological or surgical intervention. This paper explains the theoretical basis of the ABPI test, as well as the relevance of the common modifications of the test. It explores the background to the quoted normal ranges for the ABPI test. It reviews the large body of literature that has developed on the association between ABPI and cardiovascular risk, as well as ABPI as a predictor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, highlighting the evidence that can inform practice. The review looks critically at the limitations of the ABPI test, providing practitioners with an evidence-based update on the importance and challenges of standardizing ABPI methodology. This paper highlights the influence of the key technical aspects of the ABPI test that all practitioners need to consider in order to be able to make more reliable and informed management decisions based on ABPI findings.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 260 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 255 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 58 22%
Student > Master 40 15%
Student > Postgraduate 37 14%
Researcher 20 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 6%
Other 46 18%
Unknown 44 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 144 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 5%
Sports and Recreations 7 3%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Other 22 8%
Unknown 47 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 14 February 2020.
All research outputs
#2,340,843
of 19,368,131 outputs
Outputs from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#69
of 683 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,152
of 307,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,368,131 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 683 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 307,278 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.