↓ Skip to main content

Risk stratification by pre-operative cardiopulmonary exercise testing improves outcomes following elective abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery: a cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in Perioperative Medicine, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 115)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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.
Title
Risk stratification by pre-operative cardiopulmonary exercise testing improves outcomes following elective abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery: a cohort study
Published in
Perioperative Medicine, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/2047-0525-2-10
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen J Goodyear, Heng Yow, Mahmud Saedon, Joanna Shakespeare, Christopher E Hill, Duncan Watson, Colette Marshall, Asif Mahmood, Daniel Higman, Christopher HE Imray

Abstract

In 2009, the NHS evidence adoption center and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published a review of the use of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). They recommended the development of a risk-assessment tool to help identify AAA patients with greater or lesser risk of operative mortality and to contribute to mortality prediction.A low anaerobic threshold (AT), which is a reliable, objective measure of pre-operative cardiorespiratory fitness, as determined by pre-operative cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is associated with poor surgical outcomes for major abdominal surgery. We aimed to assess the impact of a CPET-based risk-stratification strategy upon perioperative mortality, length of stay and non-operative costs for elective (open and endovascular) infra-renal AAA patients.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Australia 2 3%
Unknown 56 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 20%
Student > Master 10 17%
Researcher 8 13%
Other 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Other 14 23%
Unknown 3 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 60%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 15%
Sports and Recreations 6 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Materials Science 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 05 April 2016.
All research outputs
#1,753,013
of 12,440,173 outputs
Outputs from Perioperative Medicine
#27
of 115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,356
of 195,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Perioperative Medicine
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,440,173 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 115 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 195,770 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 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them