↓ Skip to main content

Management of Pulmonary Embolism: 2010 State-of-the-Art Update

Overview of attention for article published in Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine, March 2010
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 (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
Management of Pulmonary Embolism: 2010 State-of-the-Art Update
Published in
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine, March 2010
DOI 10.1007/s11936-010-0064-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Teresa L. Carman, Florian Gegaj

Abstract

The morbidity and mortality of venous thromboembolism remain underrecognized and underappreciated. Suspected pulmonary embolism should be risk stratified using a validated clinical risk prediction tool; intermediate to high clinical suspicion requires objective diagnostic testing to confirm or refute the diagnosis. Therapy with unfractionated heparin, low molecular weight heparin, or fondaparinux should be initiated while diagnostic testing is pursued. Conversion to vitamin K antagonists requires a minimum of 5 days' overlap between the parenteral agent and the vitamin K antagonist. Anticoagulation should be continued for a minimum of 3 to 6 months. Longer or even indefinite therapy may be required with a persistent hypercoagulable state. In patients with cancer, low molecular weight heparin monotherapy for the initial 3 to 6 months is preferred. In stable patients with normal biomarkers and a normal echocardiogram, accelerated discharge and outpatient therapy may be considered. In patients with hemodynamic instability, systemic thrombolytic therapy, catheter-directed therapy, or surgical embolectomy may be considered. Cancer screening and/or thrombophilia testing should be pursued only if the findings will directly affect patient therapy or long-term care.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 62 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 22%
Other 8 12%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 16 25%
Unknown 9 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 57%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 13 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 19 July 2012.
All research outputs
#3,252,493
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine
#66
of 409 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,474
of 106,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 409 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 106,032 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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