↓ Skip to main content

Cardiovascular Disease, the Nitric Oxide Pathway and Risk of Cognitive Impairment and Dementia

Overview of attention for article published in Current Cardiology Reports, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
Title
Cardiovascular Disease, the Nitric Oxide Pathway and Risk of Cognitive Impairment and Dementia
Published in
Current Cardiology Reports, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11886-017-0898-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Blossom C. M. Stephan, Stephanie L. Harrison, Hannah A. D. Keage, Abrar Babateen, Louise Robinson, Mario Siervo

Abstract

In this review, we summarise the evidence on the association between cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cognitive impairment and explore the role of the nitric oxide (NO) pathway as a causal mechanism. Evidence from epidemiological studies suggests that the presence of CVD and its risk factors in midlife is associated with an increased risk of later life cognitive impairment and dementia. It is unclear what is driving this association but risk may be conveyed via an increase in neurodegeneration (e.g. amyloid deposition), vascular changes (e.g. small vessel disease) and mechanistically due to increased levels of oxidative stress and inflammation as well as changes in NO bioavailability. CVDs and dementia are major challenges to global health worldwide. The NO pathway may be a promising biological candidate for future studies focused on reducing not only CVD but also risk of cognitive decline and dementia.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 102 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 17%
Student > Bachelor 16 16%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Master 10 10%
Lecturer 4 4%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 34 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 10%
Psychology 8 8%
Neuroscience 8 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 36 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,853,854
of 23,189,371 outputs
Outputs from Current Cardiology Reports
#78
of 1,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,222
of 318,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Cardiology Reports
#5
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,189,371 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,011 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
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 318,844 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.