| Title |
Pharmacological interventions for hypertension in children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd008117.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Swasti Chaturvedi, Deborah H Lipszyc, Christoph Licht, Jonathan C Craig, Rulan Parekh |
| Abstract |
Hypertension is a major risk factor for stroke, coronary artery disease and kidney damage in adults. There is a paucity of data on the long-term sequelae of persistent hypertension in children, but it is known that children with hypertension have evidence of end organ damage and are at risk of hypertension into adulthood. The prevalence of hypertension in children is rising, most likely due to a concurrent rise in obesity rates. In children with hypertension, non-pharmacological measures are often recommended as first-line therapy, but a significant proportion of children will eventually require pharmacological treatment to reduce blood pressure, especially those with evidence of end organ damage at presentation or during follow-up. A systematic review of the effects of antihypertensive agents in children has not previously been conducted. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 8 | 24% |
| United Kingdom | 7 | 21% |
| Canada | 4 | 12% |
| Argentina | 2 | 6% |
| Kenya | 1 | 3% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 82% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 235 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 233 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 45 | 19% |
| Researcher | 26 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 45 | 19% |
| Unknown | 56 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 84 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 36 | 15% |
| Psychology | 9 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 26 | 11% |
| Unknown | 66 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 17 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,730,823
of 25,729,842 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,681
of 13,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,287
of 324,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#72
of 234 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,729,842 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 324,539 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 234 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.