↓ Skip to main content

Opportunistic pulse checks in primary care to improve recognition of atrial fibrillation: a retrospective analysis of electronic patient records

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Opportunistic pulse checks in primary care to improve recognition of atrial fibrillation: a retrospective analysis of electronic patient records
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, May 2018
DOI 10.3399/bjgp18x696605
Pubmed ID
Authors

James Cole, Payam Torabi, Isabel Dostal, Kate Homer, John Robson

Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an important and modifiable risk factor for stroke. Earlier identification may reduce stroke-related morbidity and mortality. Trial evidence shows that opportunistic pulse regularity checks in individuals aged ≥65 years increases detection of AF. However, this is not currently recommended by the National Screening Programme or implemented by most clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). To evaluate the impact of a systematic programme to promote pulse regularity checks, the programme's uptake in general practice, and the prevalence of AF. Retrospective analysis of electronic primary care patient records in three east London CCGs (City and Hackney, Newham, and Tower Hamlets) over 10 years. Rates of pulse regularity checks and prevalence of AF in individuals aged ≥65 years were compared from the pre-intervention period, 2007-2011, to the post-intervention period, 2012-2017. Across the three CCGs, rates of pulse regularity checks increased from a mean of 7.3% pre-intervention to 66.4% post-intervention, achieving 93.1% (n = 58 722) in the final year. Age-standardised prevalence of AF in individuals aged ≥65 years increased significantly from a pre-intervention mean of 61.4/1000 to a post-intervention mean of 64.5/1000. There was a significant increase in a post-intervention trend to a final-year mean of 67.3/1000: an improvement of 9.6% (5.9/1000) with 790 additional new cases identified. Organisational alignment, standardised data entry, peer-performance dashboards, and financial incentives rapidly and generally increased opportunistic screening with pulse regularity checks. This was associated with a significant increase in detection and prevalence of AF and is of public health importance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 17%
Researcher 7 12%
Other 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 17 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 20 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 18 February 2020.
All research outputs
#1,301,049
of 25,363,868 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#618
of 4,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,951
of 344,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#19
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,363,868 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,878 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 344,000 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.