| Title |
Prevalence of pulmonary hypertension in systemic lupus erythematosus: a meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Irish Journal of Medical Science, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11845-017-1727-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tian-Tian Lv, Peng Wang, Shi-Yang Guan, Hong-Miao Li, Xiao-Mei Li, Bin Wang, Hai-Feng Pan |
| Abstract |
Pulmonary hypertension (PH) has been suggested to be associated with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). However, the results of prevalence studies on PH in SLE vary substantially. To derive a more precise estimation on the prevalence of PH in SLE, a meta-analysis was performed. Relevant literatures were searched in PubMed and EMBASE until November 2017. A total of 1366 articles were obtained after searching databases, and 23 studies were finally included in the meta-analysis. Heterogeneity test was performed, and publication bias was evaluated. The result of analysis in random effect model showed that the pooled prevalence was 8% (95%CI 5-12%). There was no evidence of publication bias (p = 0.51). To evaluate the stability of our results, sensitivity analyses were performed, and the results showed no significant change when any one study was excluded. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that there were significant differences in PH prevalence in SLE patients of different gender, age, regions, year of publication, and diagnostic methods. PH is prevalent in SLE patients, but it was significantly different between different gender, age, regions, year of publication, and diagnostic methods. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 40% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 5% |
| Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Design | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 December 2017.
All research outputs
#20,456,235
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Irish Journal of Medical Science
#1,193
of 1,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#375,647
of 439,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Irish Journal of Medical Science
#15
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,422 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 439,953 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.