↓ Skip to main content

Discordant Perceptions of Prognosis and Treatment Options Between Physicians and Patients With Advanced Heart Failure

Overview of attention for article published in JACC: Heart Failure, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
12 news outlets
twitter
22 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Discordant Perceptions of Prognosis and Treatment Options Between Physicians and Patients With Advanced Heart Failure
Published in
JACC: Heart Failure, August 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jchf.2017.04.009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amrut V. Ambardekar, Jennifer T. Thibodeau, Adam D. DeVore, Michelle M. Kittleson, Rhondalyn C. Forde-McLean, Maryse Palardy, Maria M. Mountis, Linda Cadaret, Jeffrey J. Teuteberg, Salpy V. Pamboukian, Rongbing Xie, Lynne W. Stevenson, Garrick C. Stewart

Abstract

This study assessed patient and physician perceptions of heart failure (HF) disease severity and treatment options. The prognosis for ambulatory patients with advanced HF on medical therapy is uncertain, yet has important implications for decision making regarding transplantation and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement. Ambulatory patients with advanced HF (New York Heart Association functional class III to IV, Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support profiles 4 to 7) on optimized medical therapy were enrolled across 11 centers. At baseline, treating cardiologists rated patients for perceived risk for transplant, LVAD, or death in the upcoming year. Patients were also surveyed about their own perceptions of life expectancy and willingness to undergo various interventions. At enrollment, physicians regarded 111 of 161 patients (69%) of the total cohort to be at high risk for transplant, LVAD, or death, whereas only 23 patients (14%) felt they were at high risk. After a mean follow-up of 13 months, 61 patients (38%) experienced an endpoint of 33 deaths (21%), 13 transplants (8%), and 15 LVAD implants (9%). There was poor discrimination between risk prediction among both patients and physicians. Among physician-identified high-risk patients, 77% described willingness to consider LVAD, but 63% indicated that they would decline 1 or more other simpler forms of life-sustaining therapy such as ventilation, dialysis, or a feeding tube. Among patients with advanced HF, physicians identified most to be at high risk for transplantation, LVAD, or death, whereas few patients recognized themselves to be at high risk. Patients expressed inconsistent attitudes toward lifesaving treatments, possibly indicating poor understanding of these therapies. Educational interventions regarding disease severity and treatment options should be introduced prior to the need for advanced therapies such as intravenous inotropic therapy, transplantation, or LVAD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Other 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 17 23%
Unknown 24 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 16%
Psychology 4 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 29 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 103. 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 May 2018.
All research outputs
#407,864
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Heart Failure
#95
of 1,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,321
of 309,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Heart Failure
#4
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,583 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 309,216 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.