| Title |
Endothelial Dysfunction: Its Clinical Value and Methods of Assessment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Atherosclerosis Reports, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11883-014-0417-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Teresa Strisciuglio, Stefania De Luca, Ernesto Capuano, Rossella Luciano, Tullio Niglio, Bruno Trimarco, Gennaro Galasso |
| Abstract |
Endothelial dysfunction (ED) is a systemic disorder characterized by reduced production of nitric oxide. This pathologic condition, which impairs vascular homeostasis, leads to the loss of protective properties of endothelial cells and is related to the pathogenesis of cardiovascular diseases. ED may affect every vascular bed, accounting for several clinical implications, particularly when the coronary bed is affected. Although the reliability of ED as a cardiovascular disease surrogate is still debated, many methods for its assessment have been proposed. In this review, we underline the clinical value of ED in the cardiovascular field and summarize the principal methods currently available for its assessment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 10 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 29% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 13 | 42% |
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 26 April 2014.
All research outputs
#15,299,919
of 22,754,104 outputs
Outputs from Current Atherosclerosis Reports
#563
of 762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,711
of 226,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Atherosclerosis Reports
#9
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,754,104 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 762 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 226,860 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.