↓ Skip to main content

Clinical outcome endpoints in heart failure trials: a European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Association consensus document

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Heart Failure, January 2014
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
9 X users
patent
4 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
185 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
187 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Clinical outcome endpoints in heart failure trials: a European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Association consensus document
Published in
European Journal of Heart Failure, January 2014
DOI 10.1093/eurjhf/hft095
Pubmed ID
Authors

Faiez Zannad, Angeles Alonso Garcia, Stefan D. Anker, Paul W. Armstrong, Gonzalo Calvo, John G.F. Cleland, Jay N. Cohn, Kenneth Dickstein, Michael J. Domanski, Inger Ekman, Gerasimos S. Filippatos, Mihai Gheorghiade, Adrian F. Hernandez, Tiny Jaarsma, Joerg Koglin, Marvin Konstam, Stuart Kupfer, Aldo P. Maggioni, Alexandre Mebazaa, Marco Metra, Christina Nowack, Burkert Pieske, Ileana L. Piña, Stuart J. Pocock, Piotr Ponikowski, Giuseppe Rosano, Luis M. Ruilope, Frank Ruschitzka, Thomas Severin, Scott Solomon, Kenneth Stein, Norman L. Stockbridge, Wendy Gattis Stough, Karl Swedberg, Luigi Tavazzi, Adriaan A. Voors, Scott M. Wasserman, Holger Woehrle, Andrew Zalewski, John J.V. McMurray

Abstract

Endpoint selection is a critically important step in clinical trial design. It poses major challenges for investigators, regulators, and study sponsors, and it also has important clinical and practical implications for physicians and patients. Clinical outcomes of interest in heart failure trials include all-cause mortality, cause-specific mortality, relevant non-fatal morbidity (e.g., all-cause and cause-specific hospitalization), composites capturing both morbidity and mortality, safety, symptoms, functional capacity, and patient-reported outcomes. Each of these endpoints has strengths and weaknesses that create controversies regarding which is most appropriate in terms of clinical importance, sensitivity, reliability, and consistency. Not surprisingly, a lack of consensus exists within the scientific community regarding the optimal endpoint(s) for both acute and chronic heart failure trials. In an effort to address these issues, the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) convened a group of expert heart failure clinical investigators, biostatisticians, regulators, and pharmaceutical industry scientists (Nice, France, 12-13 February 2012) to evaluate the challenges of defining heart failure endpoints in clinical trials and to develop a consensus framework. This report summarizes the group's recommendations for achieving common views on heart failure endpoints in clinical trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 183 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 30 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 16%
Student > Master 21 11%
Professor 18 10%
Other 15 8%
Other 40 21%
Unknown 34 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 94 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Engineering 6 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Other 22 12%
Unknown 44 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 05 March 2024.
All research outputs
#2,085,730
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Heart Failure
#545
of 2,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,344
of 325,192 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Heart Failure
#11
of 360 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,559 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 325,192 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 360 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.