| Title |
Comparison of heart rate variability in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and controls
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Autonomic Research, December 1997
|
| DOI | 10.1007/bf02267720 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Yataco, H. Talo, P. Rowe, D. A. Kass, R. D. Berger, H. Calkins |
| Abstract |
Recent studies have reported a close association between chronic fatigue syndrome and neurally mediated hypotension. We hypothesized that this association may result from an abnormality in autonomic function among patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, which may be detectable using an analysis of heart rate variability. We prospectively studied 19 patients who fulfilled the Centers for Disease Control criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome and 11 controls. Each subject underwent a two-stage tilt-table test while wearing a Holter monitor. Heart rate variability was assessed in the supine baseline position and during upright tilt using frequency domain parameters. In the baseline supine position, high frequency (HF) power, low frequency (LF) power, and the ratio of low frequency power to high frequency power (LF/HF ratio) were similar. In both patient groups, upright tilt resulted in a similar decrease in HF power, increase in LF power, and increase in the LH/HF ratio. In conclusion, autonomic function, as assessed using an analysis of heart rate variability, does not differ in the baseline supine state, nor in response to upright tilt among patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and healthy controls. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 17% |
| Researcher | 3 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 01 January 2015.
All research outputs
#7,130,608
of 25,382,250 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Autonomic Research
#263
of 864 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,842
of 96,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Autonomic Research
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,250 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 864 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 96,980 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.