↓ Skip to main content

Treatment of pulmonary hypertension with left heart disease: a concise review

Overview of attention for article published in Vascular Health and Risk Management, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Treatment of pulmonary hypertension with left heart disease: a concise review
Published in
Vascular Health and Risk Management, November 2017
DOI 10.2147/vhrm.s111597
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anish Desai, Shilpa A Desouza

Abstract

Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is defined by a mean pulmonary artery pressure ≥ 25 mmHg, as determined by right heart catheterization. Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) can no longer be considered an orphan disease given the increase in awareness and availability of new drugs. PH carries with it a dismal prognosis and leads to significant morbidity and mortality. Symptoms can range from dyspnea, fatigue and chest pain to right ventricular failure and death. PH is divided into five groups by the World Health Organization (WHO), based on etiology. The most common cause of PH in developed countries is left heart disease (group 2), owing to the epidemic of heart failure (HF). The data regarding prevalence, diagnosis and treatment of patients with group 2 PH is unclear as large, prospective, randomized controlled trials and standardized protocols do not exist. Current guidelines do not support the use of PAH-specific therapy in patients with group 2 PH. Prostacyclins, endothelin receptor antagonists, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors and guanylate cyclase stimulators have been tried in treatment of patients with HF and/or group 2 PH with mixed results. This review summarizes and critically appraises the evidence for diagnosis and treatment of patients with group 2 PH/HF and suggests directions for future research.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Master 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Other 5 7%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 20 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 19 27%

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 23 November 2017.
All research outputs
#13,497,671
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#408
of 761 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,800
of 329,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 761 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 329,170 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 6 of them.