↓ Skip to main content

Nitrates for acute heart failure syndromes

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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.
Title
Nitrates for acute heart failure syndromes
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005151.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abel Wakai, Aileen McCabe, Rachel Kidney, Steven C Brooks, Rawle A Seupaul, Deborah B Diercks, Nigel Salter, Gregory J Fermann, Caroline Pospisil

Abstract

Current drug therapy for acute heart failure syndromes (AHFS) consists mainly of diuretics supplemented by vasodilators or inotropes. Nitrates have been used as vasodilators in AHFS for many years and have been shown to improve some aspects of AHFS in some small studies. The aim of this review was to determine the clinical efficacy and safety of nitrate vasodilators in AHFS.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
United States 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 120 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 15%
Researcher 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Unspecified 12 10%
Other 41 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 74 59%
Unspecified 20 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Other 10 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 16 April 2018.
All research outputs
#782,413
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,416
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,279
of 152,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#31
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 152,501 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.