| Title |
Is It Daily, Monthly, or Yearly Blood Pressure Variability that Enhances Cardiovascular Risk?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Cardiology Reports, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11886-015-0649-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eamon Dolan, Eoin O’Brien |
| Abstract |
Variability is a phenomenon common to most biological processes that we can measure and is a particular feature of blood pressure (BP). Variability causes concern for many physicians regarding its clinical meaning and potential impact on cardiovascular risk. In this review, we assess the role of different time periods of blood pressure variability (BPV) in cardiovascular risk stratification. We review the indices of BPV derived from ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM), home blood pressure measurement (HBPM), or at the clinic setting with the intention of providing a clear message for clinical practice. BPV, either derived from ABPM or HBPM, does not consistently augment cardiovascular risk prediction over and beyond that of average BP, particularly in low-risk individuals. That said, it would seem that certain medications such as calcium channel blockers may have a beneficial effect on visit-to-visit BPV and perhaps reduce the associated cardiovascular risk. This highlights the benefits in using combination therapy which might couple a number of therapeutic benefits such as the reductions of mean blood pressure and BPV. Overall, we should remain aware that the average BP level remains the main modifiable risk factor derived from BP measurements and continue to improve the control of hypertension and adverse health outcomes. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 15% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 6 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 61% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 9 | 20% |
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 14 May 2016.
All research outputs
#18,451,892
of 22,862,742 outputs
Outputs from Current Cardiology Reports
#743
of 999 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,708
of 267,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Cardiology Reports
#21
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,862,742 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 999 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 267,272 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.