| Title |
Electrophysiologic Toxicity of Chemoradiation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Oncology Reports, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11912-018-0691-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Merna A. Armanious, Shreya Mishra, Michael G. Fradley |
| Abstract |
There is growing awareness of the link between oncology treatments and cardiovascular (CV) complications. This has led to the development of cardio-oncology, a specialty aimed at managing CV risk and disease in cancer patients and survivors. Cardiac arrhythmias are potential adverse CV complications of cancer treatments; however, these cardiotoxicities are often underappreciated due to the uncertain arrhythmogenic mechanisms of various chemotherapeutic agents. Chemotherapeutic agents can induce arrhythmias via direct electrophysiological effects on ion channels or intracellular signaling pathways, or indirectly from cardiac tissue damage. As more drugs are being linked to the development of arrhythmias, a deeper understanding of the pathophysiology of their electrophysiological (EP) effects will be necessary. Expanding research in this field has allowed for the identification of novel agents with potential arrhythmogenic properties and the development of preventative measures, early recognition, and closer surveillance of patients more susceptible to these EP side effects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Librarian | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 10 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 12 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 April 2018.
All research outputs
#13,516,493
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Current Oncology Reports
#475
of 890 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,806
of 329,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Oncology Reports
#15
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 890 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 329,173 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.