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 |
Frailty Syndrome in cardiovascular disease: Clinical significance and research tools
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1177/1474515114568059 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Izabella Uchmanowicz, Magdalena Lisiak, Radosław Wontor, Maria Łoboz-Rudnicka, Beata Jankowska-Polańska, Krystyna Łoboz-Grudzień, Tiny Jaarsma |
| Abstract |
Frailty Syndrome is one of the key health problems in geriatrics, strongly affecting poor prognosis. There is a growing interest in the relevance of this syndrome in cardiovascular disease. The diagnosis of Frailty Syndrome in the elderly cardiac population is essential for an accurate risk stratification and for making therapeutic decisions. Most risk assessment systems used in cardiology are based on chronological age, which does not always reflect the biological age of a patient, therefore making an inadequate risk estimation. This paper discusses the definitions of Frailty Syndrome and research tools used to identify it. We specifically address the role of Frailty Syndrome in cardiovascular disease and the diagnostic and therapeutic difficulties in patients with Frailty Syndrome, emphasizing the role of the identification of Frailty Syndrome in making therapeutic decisions and the stratification of cardiovascular risk in patients with cardiologic conditions. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 57 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 17 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 August 2018.
All research outputs
#15,332,207
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
#645
of 839 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,459
of 355,996 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
#14
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 839 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 355,996 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.