↓ Skip to main content

Sleep Disordered Breathing and Heart Failure What Does the Future Hold?

Overview of attention for article published in JACC: Heart Failure, September 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 (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
76 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Sleep Disordered Breathing and Heart Failure What Does the Future Hold?
Published in
JACC: Heart Failure, September 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jchf.2017.06.016
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin R. Cowie, Angela M. Gallagher

Abstract

Most patients with heart failure (HF) have sleep-disordered breathing (SDB), with central (rather than obstructive) sleep apnea becoming the predominant form in patients with more severe disease. Cyclical apnea and hypopneas are associated with sleep disturbance, hypoxemia, hemodynamic changes, and sympathetic activation. These patients have a worse prognosis than those without SDB. Mask-based therapies of positive airway pressure targeted at SDB can improve measures of sleep quality and can partially normalize the sleep and respiratory physiology. However, recent randomized trials of cardiovascular outcomes in central sleep apnea in chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction have had neutral findings or suggested the possibility of harm, likely from an increased rate of sudden death. Further randomized outcome studies are required to determine whether mask-based treatment is appropriate for patients with chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction and obstructive sleep apnea, for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, and for patients with decompensated heart failure. New therapies for sleep apnea (e.g., implantable phrenic nerve stimulators) also require robust assessment. No longer can the surrogate endpoints of improvement in respiratory and sleep metrics be taken as adequate therapeutic outcome measures in patients with HF and sleep apnea.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 76 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Other 7 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Student > Master 7 7%
Other 24 22%
Unknown 37 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Psychology 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 40 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. 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 November 2017.
All research outputs
#1,017,677
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Heart Failure
#317
of 1,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,667
of 323,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Heart Failure
#9
of 39 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 95th 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 well, scoring higher than 79% 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 323,170 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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.