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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Biphasic versus monophasic shock waveform for conversion of atrial fibrillation The results of an international randomized, double-blind multicenter trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JACC, June 2002
|
| DOI | 10.1016/s0735-1097(02)01898-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Richard L Page, Richard E Kerber, James K Russell, Tom Trouton, Johan Waktare, Donna Gallik, Jeff E Olgin, Philippe Ricard, Gavin W Dalzell, Ramakota Reddy, Ralph Lazzara, Kerry Lee, Mark Carlson, Blair Halperin, Gust H Bardy, BiCard Investigators |
| Abstract |
This study compared a biphasic waveform with a conventional monophasic waveform for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF). Biphasic shock waveforms have been demonstrated to be superior to monophasic shocks for termination of ventricular fibrillation, but data regarding biphasic shocks for conversion of AF are still emerging. In an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind clinical trial, we compared the effectiveness of damped sine wave monophasic versus impedance-compensated truncated exponential biphasic shocks for the cardioversion of AF. Patients received up to five shocks, as necessary for conversion: 100 J, 150 J, 200 J, a fourth shock at maximum output for the initial waveform (200 J biphasic, 360 J monophasic) and a final cross-over shock at maximum output of the alternate waveform. Analysis included 107 monophasic and 96 biphasic patients. The success rate was higher for biphasic than for monophasic shocks at each of the three shared energy levels (100 J: 60% vs. 22%, p < 0.0001; 150 J: 77% vs. 44%, p < 0.0001; 200 J: 90% vs. 53%, p < 0.0001). Through four shocks, at a maximum of 200 J, biphasic performance was similar to monophasic performance at 360 J (91% vs. 85%, p = 0.29). Biphasic patients required fewer shocks (1.7 +/- 1.0 vs. 2.8 +/- 1.2, p < 0.0001) and lower total energy delivered (217 +/- 176 J vs. 548 +/- 331 J, p < 0.0001). The biphasic shock waveform was also associated with a lower frequency of dermal injury (17% vs. 41%, p < 0.0001). For the cardioversion of AF, a biphasic shock waveform has greater efficacy, requires fewer shocks and lower delivered energy, and results in less dermal injury than a monophasic shock waveform. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 26% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 15% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 19% |
| Unknown | 3 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 64% |
| Engineering | 6 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 3 | 6% |
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 17 October 2017.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from JACC
#9,860
of 16,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,702
of 126,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC
#34
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,741 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.0. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 126,580 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.