↓ Skip to main content

What is the most cost-effective strategy to screen for left ventricular systolic dysfunction: natriuretic peptides, the electrocardiogram, hand-held echocardiography, traditional echocardiography, or…

Overview of attention for article published in European Heart Journal, November 2005
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
What is the most cost-effective strategy to screen for left ventricular systolic dysfunction: natriuretic peptides, the electrocardiogram, hand-held echocardiography, traditional echocardiography, or their combination?
Published in
European Heart Journal, November 2005
DOI 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi559
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gavin I.W. Galasko, Sophie C. Barnes, Paul Collinson, Avijit Lahiri, Roxy Senior

Abstract

To assess the screening characteristics and cost-effectiveness of screening for left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) in community subjects.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Uruguay 1 2%
Unknown 48 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 22%
Student > Postgraduate 9 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Professor 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Other 15 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 80%
Unspecified 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Physics and Astronomy 1 2%
Other 2 4%

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 19 August 2018.
All research outputs
#3,635,851
of 12,516,641 outputs
Outputs from European Heart Journal
#2,531
of 5,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,344
of 271,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Heart Journal
#50
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,516,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,966 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 271,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.