↓ Skip to main content

Heart Failure With Mid-Range (Borderline) Ejection Fraction Clinical Implications and Future Directions

Overview of attention for article published in JACC: Heart Failure, October 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 (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
168 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
156 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 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
Heart Failure With Mid-Range (Borderline) Ejection Fraction Clinical Implications and Future Directions
Published in
JACC: Heart Failure, October 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jchf.2017.06.013
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeffrey J. Hsu, Boback Ziaeian, Gregg C. Fonarow

Abstract

Heart failure (HF) with borderline ejection fraction was first defined in 2013 in the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines as the presence of the typical symptoms of HF and a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 41% to 49%. In 2016, the European Society of Cardiology specified HF with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) as LVEF of 40% to 49%. This range of LVEF is less well studied compared with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Although there are effective, guideline-directed medical therapies for patients with HFrEF, no therapies thus far show measurable benefit in HFpEF. Patients with HFmrEF have a clinical profile and prognosis that are closer to those of patients with HFpEF than those of HFrEF, with certain distinctions. Whether these patients represent a unique and dynamic HF group that may benefit from targeted therapies known to be beneficial in patients with HFrEF, such as neurohormonal blockade, requires further study. This review summarizes what is known about the clinical epidemiology, pathophysiology, and prognosis for patients with HFmrEF and how these features compare with the more well-studied HF groups. Although recommended treatments currently focus on aggressive management of comorbidities, we summarize the studies that identify a potential signal for beneficial therapies. Future studies are needed to not only better characterize the HFmrEF population but to also determine effective management strategies to reduce the high cardiovascular morbidity and mortality burden on this phenotype of patients with HF.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 168 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 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 139 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 18%
Other 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 48 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 40%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Engineering 3 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 58 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 100. 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 03 April 2022.
All research outputs
#433,565
of 25,870,940 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Heart Failure
#105
of 1,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,068
of 336,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Heart Failure
#2
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,870,940 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 1,634 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.4. 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 336,562 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 36 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 94% of its contemporaries.