↓ Skip to main content

Sex-Based Differences in One-Year Outcomes After Mitral Valve Repair for Infective Endocarditis

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular, January 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1 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
Sex-Based Differences in One-Year Outcomes After Mitral Valve Repair for Infective Endocarditis
Published in
Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular, January 2023
DOI 10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0333
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zeinab Mohseni Afshar, Feridoun Sabzi, Maria Shirvani, Nahid Salehi, Nasim Nemati, Werya Kheradmand, Hadis Torbati, Mohammad Rouzbahani

Abstract

This study was aimed to evaluate the sex-based differences in baseline characteristics and one-year outcomes of men and women undergoing mitral valve repair for infective endocarditis. This cross-sectional study was performed at Imam Ali Hospital affiliated with the Kermanshah University of Medical Science. From March 21, 2014, to October 21, 2021, all patients who underwent mitral valve repair for infective endocarditis were enrolled in this study. Data were obtained using a checklist developed based on the study's objectives. Independent samples t-tests, paired samples t-tests, and chi-squared test (or Fisher's exact test) were used to assess the differences between subgroups. Of 75 patients, 26 were women (34.7%) and 49 were men (65.3%). Women were more likely to have diabetes mellitus (20.4% vs. 57.7%, P=0.0001), hypertension (49% vs. 80.8%, P=0.007), and hypercholesterolemia (55.1% vs. 80.8%, P=0.027). Conversely, men were more likely to have a history of smoking (38.8% vs. 7.7%, P=0.004). After one year, women had significantly higher mortality (0% vs. 7.7%, P=0.049), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (51.0 vs. 76.9, P=0.029), mitral valve reoperation (8.1% vs. 34.6%, P=0.003), and treatment failure (30.6% vs. 61.5%, P=0.009) rates than men. Mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, mitral valve reoperation, and treatment failure rates were higher in women than in men. The worse outcomes in women may be explained by their more adverse clinical risk profile.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 1 Mendeley reader of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 1 100%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 1 100%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 August 2023.
All research outputs
#16,737,737
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular
#130
of 363 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,545
of 475,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular
#3
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 363 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 475,313 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.