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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Electro-echocardiographic Indices to Predict Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Non-response on Non-ischemic Cardiomyopathy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep44009 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ziqing Yu, Xueying Chen, Fei Han, Shengmei Qin, Minghui Li, Yuan Wu, Yangang Su, Junbo Ge |
| Abstract |
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) threw lights on heart failure treatment, however, parts of patients showed nonresponse to CRT. Unfortunately, it lacks effective parameters to predict CRT non-response. In present study, we try to seek effective electro-echocardiographic predictors on CRT non-response. This is a retrospective study to review a total of 227 patients of dyssynchronous heart failure underwent CRT implantation. Logistic analysis was performed between CRT responders and CRT non-responders. The primary outcome was the occurrence of improved left ventricular ejection fraction 1 year after CRT implantation. We concluded that LVEDV > 255 mL (OR = 2.236; 95% CI, 1.016-4.923) rather than LVESV > 160 mL (OR = 1.18; 95% CI, 0.544-2.56) and TpTe/QTc > 0.203 (OR = 5.206; 95% CI, 1.89-14.34) significantly predicted CRT non-response. Oppositely, S wave > 5.7 cm/s (OR = 0.242; 95% CI, 0.089-0.657), E/A > 1 (OR = 0.211; 95% CI, 0.079-0.566), E'/A' > 1 (OR = 0.054; 95% CI, 0.017-0.172), CLBBB (OR = 0.141; 95% CI, 0.048-0.409), and QRS duration >160 ms (OR = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.305-0.922) surprisingly predicted low-probability of CRT non-response. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 56% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Design | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 March 2017.
All research outputs
#20,408,464
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#105,969
of 123,956 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,257
of 307,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#3,780
of 4,596 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 123,956 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 307,830 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,596 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.