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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Passive ventricular remodeling in cardiac disease: focus on heterogeneity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2014.00482 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elise L. Kessler, Mohamed Boulaksil, Harold V. M. van Rijen, Marc A. Vos, Toon A. B. van Veen |
| Abstract |
Passive ventricular remodeling is defined by the process of molecular ventricular adaptation to different forms of cardiac pathophysiology. It includes changes in tissue architecture, such as hypertrophy, fiber disarray, alterations in cell size and fibrosis. Besides that, it also includes molecular remodeling of gap junctions, especially those composed by Connexin43 proteins (Cx43) in the ventricles that affect cell-to-cell propagation of the electrical impulse, and changes in the sodium channels that modify excitability. All those alterations appear mainly in a heterogeneous manner, creating irregular and inhomogeneous electrical and mechanical coupling throughout the heart. This can predispose to reentry arrhythmias and adds to a further deterioration into heart failure. In this review, passive ventricular remodeling is described in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (HCM), Dilated Cardiomyopathy (DCM), Ischemic Cardiomyopathy (ICM), and Arrhythmogenic Cardiomyopathy (ACM), with a main focus on the heterogeneity of those alterations mentioned above. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 57 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 9 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 12% |
| Engineering | 7 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 12 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 December 2014.
All research outputs
#18,387,239
of 22,775,504 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#8,096
of 13,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,758
of 353,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#65
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,775,504 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,560 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 353,034 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.