↓ Skip to main content

American College of Cardiology

Can Vaccinations Improve Heart Failure Outcomes? Contemporary Data and Future Directions

Overview of attention for article published in JACC: Heart Failure, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#40 of 1,624)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
twitter
146 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
Title
Can Vaccinations Improve Heart Failure Outcomes? Contemporary Data and Future Directions
Published in
JACC: Heart Failure, February 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jchf.2016.12.007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ankeet S. Bhatt, Adam D. DeVore, Adrian F. Hernandez, Robert J. Mentz

Abstract

Heart failure (HF) is a chronic syndrome characterized by acute exacerbations. There is significant overlap between respiratory infections and exacerbation of underlying HF. Vaccination against respiratory infections in patients with HF could serve as a potential cost-effective intervention to improve patients' quality of life and clinical outcomes. The benefits of influenza vaccination in secondary prevention of ischemic heart disease have been previously studied. However, the evidence for influenza and pneumococcal vaccination specifically in the HF population is less well established. Furthermore, questions around the optimal timing, dose, frequency, and implementation strategies are largely unanswered. This review highlights the current evidence for vaccination against influenza and pneumococcal pneumonia in HF and cardiovascular disease. It summarizes current understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms in which vaccination may provide cardioprotection. Finally, it offers opportunities for further investigation of the effects of vaccination in the HF population, spanning basic science, translational research, and large clinical trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 146 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 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 14%
Student > Master 11 13%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Other 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 25 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Psychology 2 2%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 31 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 165. 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 15 May 2020.
All research outputs
#250,256
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Heart Failure
#40
of 1,624 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,407
of 427,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Heart Failure
#2
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,624 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 427,073 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 94% of its contemporaries.