↓ Skip to main content

Diagnosing Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: Are Biomarkers the Solution to This Elusive Arrhythmia?

Overview of attention for article published in BioMed Research International, July 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 (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
81 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
Diagnosing Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: Are Biomarkers the Solution to This Elusive Arrhythmia?
Published in
BioMed Research International, July 2015
DOI 10.1155/2015/910267
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the commonest sustained arrhythmia globally and results in significantly increased morbidity and mortality including a fivefold risk of stroke. Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) constitutes approximately half of all AF cases and is thought to represent an early stage of the disease. This intermittent form of atrial arrhythmia can be a challenge to identify and as a result many affected individuals are not prescribed appropriate antithrombotic therapy and hence are at risk of stroke and thromboembolism. Despite these adverse outcomes there have been relatively few diagnostic advances in the field since the introduction of the Holter monitor in 1949. This review aims to establish the available evidence for electrophysiological, molecular, and morphological biomarkers to improve the detection of PAF with reference to the underlying mechanisms for the condition.

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 81 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 2 2%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 78 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Researcher 9 11%
Other 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 17 21%
Unknown 25 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Engineering 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 31 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 18 April 2022.
All research outputs
#3,875,106
of 27,340,932 outputs
Outputs from BioMed Research International
#1,023
of 10,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,140
of 279,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioMed Research International
#51
of 474 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,340,932 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,943 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 279,811 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 474 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.