↓ Skip to main content

At the heart of the arterial baroreflex: a physiological basis for a new classification of carotid sinus hypersensitivity

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Internal Medicine, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
At the heart of the arterial baroreflex: a physiological basis for a new classification of carotid sinus hypersensitivity
Published in
Journal of Internal Medicine, March 2013
DOI 10.1111/joim.12042
Pubmed ID
Authors

W. Wieling, C. T. P. Krediet, D. Solari, F. J. de Lange, N. van Dijk, R. D. Thijs, J. G. van Dijk, M. Brignole, D. L. Jardine

Abstract

The aim of this review is to provide an update of the current knowledge of the physiological mechanisms underlying reflex syncope. Carotid sinus syncope will be used as the classical example of an autonomic reflex with relatively well-established afferent, central and efferent pathways. These pathways, as well as the pathophysiology of carotid sinus hypersensitivity (CSH) and the haemodynamic effects of cardiac standstill and vasodilatation will be discussed. We will demonstrate that continuous recordings of arterial pressure provide a better understanding of the cardiovascular mechanisms mediating arterial hypotension and cerebral hypoperfusion in patients with reflex syncope. Finally we will demonstrate that the current criteria to diagnose CSH are too lenient and that the conventional classification of carotid sinus syncope as cardioinhibitory, mixed and vasodepressor subtypes should be revised because isolated cardioinhibitory CSH (asystole without a fall in arterial pressure) does not occur. Instead, we suggest that all patients with CSH should be thought of as being 'mixed', between cardioinhibition and vasodepression. The proposed stricter set of criteria for CSH should be evaluated in future studies.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 40 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 23%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Master 5 12%
Other 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 11 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 02 March 2014.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Internal Medicine
#2,860
of 2,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,862
of 210,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Internal Medicine
#32
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,999 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 210,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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.