↓ Skip to main content

Psychosocial risk factors for coronary heart disease

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Journal of Australia, August 2013
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Psychosocial risk factors for coronary heart disease
Published in
Medical Journal of Australia, August 2013
DOI 10.5694/mja13.10440
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nick Glozier, Geoffrey H Tofler, David M Colquhoun, Stephen J Bunker, David M Clarke, David L Hare, Ian B Hickie, James Tatoulis, David R Thompson, Alison Wilson, Maree G Branagan

Abstract

In 2003, the National Heart Foundation of Australia published a position statement on psychosocial risk factors and coronary heart disease (CHD). This consensus statement provides an updated review of the literature on psychosocial stressors, including chronic stressors (in particular, work stress), acute individual stressors and acute population stressors, to guide health professionals based on current evidence. It complements a separate updated statement on depression and CHD. Perceived chronic job strain and shift work are associated with a small absolute increased risk of developing CHD, but there is limited evidence regarding their effect on the prognosis of CHD. Evidence regarding a relationship between CHD and job (in)security, job satisfaction, working hours, effort-reward imbalance and job loss is inconclusive. Expert consensus is that workplace programs aimed at weight loss, exercise and other standard cardiovascular risk factors may have positive outcomes for these risk factors, but no evidence is available regarding the effect of such programs on the development of CHD. Social isolation after myocardial infarction (MI) is associated with an adverse prognosis. Expert consensus is that although measures to reduce social isolation are likely to produce positive psychosocial effects, it is unclear whether this would also improve CHD outcomes. Acute emotional stress may trigger MI or takotsubo ("stress") cardiomyopathy, but the absolute increase in transient risk from an individual stressor is low. Psychosocial stressors have an impact on CHD, but clinical significance and prevention require further study. Awareness of the potential for increased cardiovascular risk among populations exposed to natural disasters and other conditions of extreme stress may be useful for emergency services response planning. Wider public access to defibrillators should be available where large populations gather, such as sporting venues and airports, and as part of the response to natural and other disasters.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Denmark 1 2%
Unknown 40 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Other 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 9 21%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 14%
Psychology 4 10%
Social Sciences 4 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 9 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 06 October 2017.
All research outputs
#1,550,673
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Medical Journal of Australia
#889
of 5,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,090
of 209,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Journal of Australia
#7
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 209,102 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.