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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Potential U.S. Population Impact of the 2017 ACC/AHA High Blood Pressure Guideline
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JACC, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.073 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paul Muntner, Robert M. Carey, Samuel Gidding, Daniel W. Jones, Sandra J. Taler, Jackson T. Wright, Paul K. Whelton |
| Abstract |
The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults provides recommendations for the definition of hypertension, systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) thresholds for initiation of antihypertensive medication and BP target goals. Determine the prevalence of hypertension, implications of recommendations for antihypertensive medication and prevalence of BP above the treatment goal among US adults using criteria from the 2017 ACC/AHA and the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC7) guidelines. We analyzed data from the 2011-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (N=9,623). NHANES participants completed study interviews and an examination. For each participant, blood pressure was measured three times following a standardized protocol and averaged. Results were weighted to produce US population estimates. According to the 2017 ACC/AHA and JNC7 guidelines, the overall crude prevalence of hypertension among US adults was 45.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 43.6%,47.6%) and 31.9% (95%CI 30.1%, 33.7%), respectively, and antihypertensive medication was recommended for 36.2% (95%CI 34.2%, 38.2%) and 34.3% (32.5%, 36.2%) of US adults, respectively. Compared to US adults recommended antihypertensive medication by JNC7, those recommended treatment by the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline but not JNC7 had higher CVD risk. Non-pharmacological intervention is advised for the 9.4% of US adults with hypertension according to the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline who are not recommended antihypertensive medication. Among US adults taking antihypertensive medication, 53.4% (95%CI 49.9%, 56.8%) and 39.0% (95%CI 36.4%, 41.6%) had BP above the treatment goal according to the 2017 ACC/AHA and JNC7 guidelines, respectively. Overall, 103.3 (95%CI 92.7, 114.0) million US adults had hypertension according to the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline of whom 81.9 (95%CI 73.8, 90.1) million were recommended antihypertensive medication. Compared with the JNC 7 guideline, the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline results in a substantial increase in the prevalence of hypertension but a small increase in the percentage of U.S. adults recommended antihypertensive medication. A substantial proportion of US adults taking antihypertensive medication is recommended more intensive BP lowering under the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 84 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 18 | 21% |
| United States | 7 | 8% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 4 | 5% |
| Argentina | 4 | 5% |
| Colombia | 2 | 2% |
| Paraguay | 2 | 2% |
| Ecuador | 2 | 2% |
| Peru | 2 | 2% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 34 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 62 | 74% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 12 | 14% |
| Scientists | 5 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 239 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 239 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 26 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 8% |
| Other | 18 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 8% |
| Other | 61 | 26% |
| Unknown | 77 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 69 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 20 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 35 | 15% |
| Unknown | 92 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 641. 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 11 September 2022.
All research outputs
#34,673
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from JACC
#84
of 16,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#655
of 338,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC
#6
of 279 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,923 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 99% 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 338,002 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 279 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.