↓ Skip to main content

Novel Methods for Pulse Wave Velocity Measurement

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#4 of 108)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users
patent
6 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
201 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
360 Mendeley
Title
Novel Methods for Pulse Wave Velocity Measurement
Published in
Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s40846-015-0086-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tânia Pereira, Carlos Correia, João Cardoso

Abstract

The great incidence of cardiovascular (CV) diseases in the world spurs the search for new solutions to enable an early detection of pathological processes and provides more precise diagnosis based in multi-parameters assessment. The pulse wave velocity (PWV) is considered one of the most important clinical parameters for evaluate the CV risk, vascular adaptation, and therapeutic efficacy. Several studies were dedicated to find the relationship between PWV measurement and pathological status in different diseases, and proved the relevance of this parameter. The commercial devices dedicate to PWV estimation make a regional assessment (measured between two vessels), however a local measurement is more precise evaluation of artery condition, taking into account the differences in the structure of arteries. Moreover, the current devices present some limitations due to the contact nature. Emerging trends in CV monitoring are moving away from more invasive technologies to non-invasive and non-contact solutions. The great challenge is to explore the new instrumental solutions that allow the PWV assessment with fewer approximations for an accurately evaluation and relatively inexpensive techniques in order to be used in the clinical routine.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 360 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 358 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 56 16%
Student > Master 53 15%
Student > Bachelor 49 14%
Researcher 43 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 5%
Other 49 14%
Unknown 91 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 88 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 77 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 4%
Sports and Recreations 15 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 4%
Other 49 14%
Unknown 103 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 13 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,929,800
of 23,968,814 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering
#4
of 108 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,008
of 282,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,968,814 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 108 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 282,999 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 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