↓ Skip to main content

Maladaptive Cardiac Autonomic Control during a Stress Reactivity Assessment Among Primary Care Patients with Metabolic Syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Maladaptive Cardiac Autonomic Control during a Stress Reactivity Assessment Among Primary Care Patients with Metabolic Syndrome
Published in
Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10484-017-9355-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan C. Mitchell, Joyce Paulson, Maria Cannarozzi, Sandra M. Neer, Jeffrey E. Cassisi

Abstract

Metabolic syndrome (MetS) comprises a constellation of metabolic abnormalities that substantially increase risk for chronic illnesses. Autonomic dysregulation is closely linked to MetS, and while pathophysiological models often address chronic stress exposure, none have examined how such physiological contributions operate situationally, in a clinical setting. We used ambulatory impedance cardiography to examine indicators of cardiac autonomic control (CAC) in a sample of 50 adult primary care patients with and without MetS. Indices of independent sympathetic and parasympathetic cardiovascular control in primary care outpatients were measured during a brief stress reactivity assessment. We compared interdependent CAC features, including cardiac autonomic balance (i.e., sympathovagal reciprocity) and cardiac autonomic regulation (i.e., sympathovagal coactivation) and found significant differences among MetS participants as compared to healthy controls. In particular, cardiac autonomic regulation scores were higher among MetS patients when discussing medication concerns, and cardiac autonomic balance scores were lower among MetS patients when discussing daily stressors. These results suggest that patients meeting criteria for MetS demonstrate momentary variations in CAC depending on personally relevant health topics. The potential for future research is discussed with a focus on prospective data collection to enhance diagnostic procedures and treatment monitoring.

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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 16%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 9 24%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 24%
Neuroscience 3 8%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 9 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 March 2017.
All research outputs
#15,526,761
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback
#246
of 355 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,767
of 312,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 355 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 312,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.