| Title |
Obesity and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factor, Paradox, and Impact of Weight Loss
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JACC, May 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.12.068 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carl J. Lavie, Richard V. Milani, Hector O. Ventura |
| Abstract |
Obesity has reached global epidemic proportions in both adults and children and is associated with numerous comorbidities, including hypertension (HTN), type II diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, obstructive sleep apnea and sleep-disordered breathing, certain cancers, and major cardiovascular (CV) diseases. Because of its maladaptive effects on various CV risk factors and its adverse effects on CV structure and function, obesity has a major impact on CV diseases, such as heart failure (HF), coronary heart disease (CHD), sudden cardiac death, and atrial fibrillation, and is associated with reduced overall survival. Despite this adverse association, numerous studies have documented an obesity paradox in which overweight and obese people with established CV disease, including HTN, HF, CHD, and peripheral arterial disease, have a better prognosis compared with nonoverweight/nonobese patients. This review summarizes the adverse effects of obesity on CV disease risk factors and its role in the pathogenesis of various CV diseases, reviews the obesity paradox and potential explanations for these puzzling data, and concludes with a discussion regarding the current state of weight reduction in the prevention and treatment of CV diseases. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 | 3 | 30% |
| Mexico | 1 | 10% |
| France | 1 | 10% |
| Japan | 1 | 10% |
| Egypt | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,443 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 9 | <1% |
| Spain | 8 | <1% |
| Australia | 3 | <1% |
| Portugal | 3 | <1% |
| Japan | 3 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 17 | 1% |
| Unknown | 1393 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 248 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 215 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 161 | 11% |
| Researcher | 139 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 87 | 6% |
| Other | 278 | 19% |
| Unknown | 315 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 463 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 125 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 106 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 78 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 54 | 4% |
| Other | 221 | 15% |
| Unknown | 396 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 58. 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 08 October 2023.
All research outputs
#744,834
of 25,651,057 outputs
Outputs from JACC
#1,857
of 16,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,684
of 104,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC
#2
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,651,057 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,797 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 well, scoring higher than 88% 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 104,580 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 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 97% of its contemporaries.