↓ Skip to main content

Approaches to Improving Adherence to Secondary Prophylaxis for Rheumatic Fever and Rheumatic Heart Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cardiology in Review, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
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.
Title
Approaches to Improving Adherence to Secondary Prophylaxis for Rheumatic Fever and Rheumatic Heart Disease
Published in
Cardiology in Review, March 2016
DOI 10.1097/crd.0000000000000065
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marc G. W. Rémond, Meaghan E. Coyle, Jane E. Mills, Graeme P. Maguire

Abstract

Acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and rheumatic heart disease (RHD) are auto-immune conditions resulting from infection with group A streptococcus. Current management of these conditions includes secondary antibiotic prevention. This comprises regular 3 to 4 weekly long-acting intramuscular benzathine penicillin injections. Secondary antibiotic prevention aims to protect individuals against reinfection with group A streptococcus, thereby preventing recurrent ARF and the risk of further damage to the heart valves. However, the uptake of benzathine penicillin can be poor leaving patients at risk of avoidable and progressive heart damage. This review utilizes the Chronic Care Model as a framework to discuss initiatives to enhance the delivery of secondary antibiotic prophylaxis for ARF and RHD. Results from the search strategy utilized revealed that there is limited pertinent published evidence. The evidence that is available suggests that register/recall systems, dedicated health teams for delivery of secondary antibiotic prophylaxis, education about ARF and RHD, linkages with the community (particularly between health services and schools) and strong staff-patient relationships may be important. However, it is difficult to generalize findings from individual studies to other settings and high quality studies are lacking. While secondary antibiotic prophylaxis is an effective treatment for those with ARF or RHD, the difficulties in implementing effective programs that reduce the burden of ARF and RHD demonstrates the importance of on-going work in developing and evaluating research translation initiatives.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 61 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Other 5 8%
Other 13 21%
Unknown 15 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 16%
Psychology 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 18 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 11 February 2016.
All research outputs
#14,474,215
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cardiology in Review
#229
of 651 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,828
of 312,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cardiology in Review
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 651 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 312,602 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them