↓ Skip to main content

Examining the Effects of Remote Monitoring Systems on Activation, Self-care, and Quality of Life in Older Patients With Chronic Heart Failure

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, January 2015
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 (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
263 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.
Article details
Title
Examining the Effects of Remote Monitoring Systems on Activation, Self-care, and Quality of Life in Older Patients With Chronic Heart Failure
Published in
Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, January 2015
DOI 10.1097/jcn.0000000000000110
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The use of remote monitoring systems (RMSs) in healthcare has grown exponentially and has improved the accessibility to and ability of patients to engage in treatment intensification. However, research describing the effects of RMSs on activation, self-care, and quality of life (QOL) in older patients with heart failure (HF) is limited.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 263 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 256 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 16%
Researcher 30 11%
Student > Bachelor 23 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 8%
Student > Postgraduate 13 5%
Other 47 18%
Unknown 86 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 55 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 52 20%
Psychology 13 5%
Computer Science 10 4%
Social Sciences 5 2%
Other 30 11%
Unknown 98 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 07 December 2021.
All research outputs
#6,692,973
of 34,559,526 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
#146
of 1,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,276
of 410,735 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
#2
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,559,526 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,301 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 410,735 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.