↓ Skip to main content

Acute Heart Failure: Definition, Classification and Epidemiology

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#21 of 369)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
236 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1091 Mendeley
Title
Acute Heart Failure: Definition, Classification and Epidemiology
Published in
Current Heart Failure Reports, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11897-017-0351-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sameer Kurmani, Iain Squire

Abstract

The purpose of this review is to describe the extent and scope of acute heart failure (AHF), place it within its clinical context and highlight some of the difficulties in defining it as a pathophysiological entity. A diagnosis of AHF is made when patients present acutely with signs and symptoms of heart failure, often with decompensation of pre-existing cardiomyopathy. The most current guidelines classify based on clinical features at initial presentation and are used to both risk stratify and guide the management of haemodynamic compromise. Despite this, AHF remains a diagnosis with a poor prognosis and there is no therapy proven to have long-term mortality benefits. We provide an introduction to AHF and discuss its definition, causes and precipitants. We also present epidemiological and demographic data to suggest that there is significant patient heterogeneity and that AHF is not a single pathology, but rather a range of pathophysiological entities. This poses a challenge when designing clinical trials and may, at least in part, explain why the results in this area have been largely disappointing.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,091 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1091 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 207 19%
Student > Master 86 8%
Student > Postgraduate 63 6%
Other 56 5%
Researcher 55 5%
Other 140 13%
Unknown 484 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 363 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 62 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 35 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 31 3%
Unspecified 18 2%
Other 80 7%
Unknown 502 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 29 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,487,980
of 25,591,967 outputs
Outputs from Current Heart Failure Reports
#21
of 369 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,971
of 328,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Heart Failure Reports
#1
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,591,967 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 369 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 328,238 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.