| Title |
Acute Hypertensive Response Management in Patients with Acute Stroke
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Cardiology Reports, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11886-013-0426-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Syeda L. Alqadri, Varun Sreenivasan, Adnan I. Qureshi |
| Abstract |
Acute elevation in blood pressure (acute hypertensive response) is commonly observed in the early period of both ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke. The management of acute hypertensive response depends upon the underlying intracranial pathology. Management of acute hypertensive response has been the focus of many trials and studies such as the SCAST trial, CHHIPS trial, COSSACS trial, INTERACT, and ATACH trial, which are discussed here. However, there were many limitations to these trials including time of presentation, different pathophysiology of ischemic strokes versus hemorrhagic strokes, and patient related factors. Ongoing clinical trials which take these limitations into account include ENCHANTED trial, ATACH II trial, INTERACT 2 trial, and ENOS trial. The results of these trials are expected to modify current guidelines of acute stroke, both ischemic and hemorrhagic, and potentially improve clinical outcomes and quality of life. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 43 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 18% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 9% |
| Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 18% |
| Unknown | 6 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 52% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 8 | 18% |
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 24 November 2013.
All research outputs
#18,354,532
of 22,731,677 outputs
Outputs from Current Cardiology Reports
#738
of 995 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,787
of 211,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Cardiology Reports
#13
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,731,677 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 995 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 211,698 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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.