↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of Feasibility of 2 Novel Heart Failure Monitoring Instruments to Facilitate Patient Recognition of Symptoms

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Evaluation of Feasibility of 2 Novel Heart Failure Monitoring Instruments to Facilitate Patient Recognition of Symptoms
Published in
Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, January 2016
DOI 10.1097/jcn.0000000000000213
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To maintain clinical stability, patients with heart failure (HF) must recognize often subtle but clinically significant symptoms that can precede decompensation. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of 2 patient self-monitoring instruments designed to facilitate both HF symptom recognition and reporting of these symptoms to providers. Secondary goals included assessment of actions taken by patients when their symptoms indicated potential HF decompensation, changes in self-care management, and patients' perceptions of the usefulness of the instruments in symptom monitoring.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 63 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 Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 62 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 19 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 18 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 16%
Psychology 6 10%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 21 33%
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 25 November 2014.
All research outputs
#27,763,431
of 34,410,798 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
#845
of 1,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#335,473
of 446,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,798 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,297 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 446,408 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.