| Title |
Current Management and Future Directions of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: a Contemporary Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11936-018-0623-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chayakrit Krittanawong, Marrick L. Kukin |
| Abstract |
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), a complex and debilitating syndrome, is commonly seen in elderly populations. Exacerbation of HFpEF is among the most common reasons for hospital admission in the USA. The high rate of morbidity and mortality from this condition underscores the fact that HFpEF is heterogeneous, complex, and poorly characterized. Randomized, controlled trials have been very successful at identifying treatments for HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but effective treatment options for HFpEF are lacking. Here, we discuss (1) the pathophysiology of HFpEF, (2) a standardized diagnostic and therapeutic approach, (3) a comparison of the management of recent guidelines, and (4) challenges and future directions for HFpEF management. The authors believe that it is important to identify new subtypes of HFpEF to better classify genotypes and phenotypes of HFpEF and to develop novel targeted therapies. It is our hypothesis that big data analytics will shine new light on unique HFpEF phenotypes that better respond to treatment modalities. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 20% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 20% |
| Unknown | 13 | 30% |
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 01 June 2018.
All research outputs
#15,503,317
of 23,039,416 outputs
Outputs from Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine
#287
of 416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,223
of 332,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine
#16
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,039,416 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 416 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 332,301 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.