| Title |
Calcium score, coronary artery disease extent and severity, and clinical outcomes among low Framingham risk patients with low vs high lifetime risk: Results from the CONFIRM registry
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12350-013-9819-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Edward Hulten, Todd C. Villines, Michael K. Cheezum, Daniel S. Berman, Allison Dunning, Stephan Achenbach, Mouaz Al-Mallah, Matthew J. Budoff, Filippo Cademartiri, Tracy Q. Callister, Hyuk-Jae Chang, Victor Y. Cheng, Kavitha Chinnaiyan, Benjamin J.W. Chow, Ricardo C. Cury, Augustin Delago, Gudrun Feuchtner, Martin Hadamitzky, Jörg Hausleiter, Philipp A. Kaufmann, Yong-Jin Kim, Jonathon Leipsic, Fay Y. Lin, Erica Maffei, Fabian Plank, Gilbert L. Raff, Leslee J. Shaw, James K. Min, for the CONFIRM Investigators |
| Abstract |
Short-term risk scores, such as the Framingham risk score (FRS), frequently classify younger patients as low risk despite the presence of uncontrolled cardiovascular risk factors. Among patients with low FRS, estimation of lifetime risk is associated with significant differences in coronary arterial calcium scores (CACS); however, the relationship of lifetime risk to coronary atherosclerosis on coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and prognosis has not been studied. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Argentina | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 53 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 11 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 52% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 17 | 31% |
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 12 February 2015.
All research outputs
#16,046,765
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#1,124
of 2,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,427
of 318,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#10
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 318,639 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.