↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
“Reverse McConnell's Sign”: Interpreting Interventricular Hemodynamic Dependency and Guiding the Management of Acute Heart Failure during Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy
Published in
Clinical Medicine Insights: Cardiology, March 2015
DOI 10.4137/cmc.s18756
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Although most patients with Takotsubo cardiomyopathy (TTC) have benign clinical course and prognosis, TTC can induce acute heart failure and hemodynamic instability. TTC mimics the clinical features of acute anterior wall myocardial infarction (AMI). Bedside clinicians often have a diagnostic dilemma when cardiac catheterization and angiography are either contraindicated or can cause potential adverse consequences. Misdiagnosing TTC as AMI will lead to initiation of harmful pharmacological or device-based treatment, which worsens hemodynamic compromise. Therefore, understanding and interpreting the unique pathophysiological and hemodynamic features of TTC in a better manner becomes crucial to guide effective clinical management of acute heart failure/cardiogenic shock during TTC. We review recent advances in echocardiographic diagnosis of TTC and its role in guiding bedside management of acute heart failure and cardiogenic shock, with specific focus on the interpretation of discrepant, but reciprocally dependent, left and right ventricular hemodynamics during acute stages of TTC.

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 25 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 %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 16%
Other 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 5 20%
Unknown 6 24%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 48%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 8 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 December 2019.
All research outputs
#16,675,777
of 27,778,980 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Medicine Insights: Cardiology
#30
of 49 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,527
of 281,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Medicine Insights: Cardiology
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,778,980 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 49 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one scored the same or higher as 19 of them.
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 281,281 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.