↓ Skip to main content

Alteration in blood pressures associated with combined alcohol and oral contraceptive use—The lipid research clinics prevalence study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Chronic Diseases, January 1982
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
2 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
Alteration in blood pressures associated with combined alcohol and oral contraceptive use—The lipid research clinics prevalence study
Published in
Journal of Chronic Diseases, January 1982
DOI 10.1016/0021-9681(82)90081-9
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Alterations in systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels associated with combined oral contraceptive (OC) and alcohol use were investigated in white women 20-49 years of age from 10 North American Lipid Research Clinics study populations. OC users had systolic pressures 2-3 mm Hg higher than non-users, but no difference was noted for diastolic pressures. Among non-OC users, both systolic and diastolic blood pressures were positively associated with reported alcohol consumption, though participants reporting no alcohol use had blood pressures slightly higher than those reporting minimal intake. The blood pressure correlates of OC's and alcohol appeared to be independent, and systolic pressures levels were over 8 mm Hg higher in those reporting heavier alcohol intake and OC use than among those reporting minimal alcohol intake and no OC use.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 2 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 1 50%
Student > Postgraduate 1 50%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 March 2018.
All research outputs
#4,505,740
of 29,868,835 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Chronic Diseases
#67
of 579 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,340
of 34,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Chronic Diseases
#1
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,868,835 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 579 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 34,908 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 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.