↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Fixed combination of lercanidipine and enalapril in the management of hypertension: focus on patient preference and adherence

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Fixed combination of lercanidipine and enalapril in the management of hypertension: focus on patient preference and adherence
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, June 2012
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s23232
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudio Borghi, Santi Francesca

Abstract

Hypertension is one of the most important and widespread risk factors for the development of cardiovascular disease. Once, combination therapy was traditionally reserved as a third-line or fourth-line approach in the management of hypertension. However, several major intervention trials in high-risk patient populations have shown that an average of 2-4 antihypertensive agents are required to achieve effective blood pressure control. Combination treatment should be considered as a first choice in patients at high cardiovascular risk and in individuals for whom blood pressure is markedly above the hypertension threshold (eg, more than 20 mmHg systolic or 10 mmHg diastolic), or when milder degrees of blood pressure elevation are associated with multiple risk factors, subclinical organ damage, diabetes, renal failure, or associated cardiovascular disease. A number of clinical trials have demonstrated that a fixed combination of lercanidipine and enalapril has better efficacy and tolerability than monotherapy with either agents. The fixed-dose formulation of lercanidipine-enalapril was well tolerated in all clinical trials, with an adverse event rate similar to that of the component drugs as monotherapy. The advantages of combination therapy include improved adherence to therapy and minimization of blood pressure variability. In addition, combining two antihypertensive agents with different mechanisms of action may provide greater protection against major cardiovascular events and the development of end-organ damage.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 25%
Other 3 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Librarian 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 19%
Psychology 3 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 19%
Unknown 1 6%

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 18 June 2012.
All research outputs
#10,020,683
of 12,522,829 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#871
of 1,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,034
of 119,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#25
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,522,829 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 1,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 119,845 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.