| Title |
Challenges in personalised management of chronic diseases—heart failure as prominent example to advance the care process
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
EPMA Journal, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13167-016-0051-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hans-Peter Brunner-La Rocca, Lutz Fleischhacker, Olga Golubnitschaja, Frank Heemskerk, Thomas Helms, Thom Hoedemakers, Sandra Huygen Allianses, Tiny Jaarsma, Judita Kinkorova, Jan Ramaekers, Peter Ruff, Ivana Schnur, Emilio Vanoli, Jose Verdu, Bettina Zippel-Schultz |
| Abstract |
Chronic diseases are the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in Europe, accounting for more than 2/3 of all death causes and 75 % of the healthcare costs. Heart failure is one of the most prominent, prevalent and complex chronic conditions and is accompanied with multiple other chronic diseases. The current approach to care has important shortcomings with respect to diagnosis, treatment and care processes. A critical aspect of this situation is that interaction between stakeholders is limited and chronic diseases are usually addressed in isolation. Health care in Western countries requires an innovative approach to address chronic diseases to provide sustainability of care and to limit the excessive costs that may threaten the current systems. The increasing prevalence of chronic diseases combined with their enormous economic impact and the increasing shortage of healthcare providers are among the most critical threats. Attempts to solve these problems have failed, and future limitations in financial resources will result in much lower quality of care. Thus, changing the approach to care for chronic diseases is of utmost social importance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 88 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 14% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 28 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 14% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 9 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 23 | 26% |
| Unknown | 29 | 33% |
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 30 January 2016.
All research outputs
#16,291,311
of 23,999,200 outputs
Outputs from EPMA Journal
#181
of 318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,913
of 403,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EPMA Journal
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,999,200 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. 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 403,682 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 2 of them.