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 |
The Effects of Tai Chi Training in Patients with Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2017.00989 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiaomeng Ren, Yanda Li, Xinyu Yang, Jie Li, Huilong Li, Zhengzhong Yuan, Yikun Sun, Hongcai Shang, Yanwei Xing, Yonghong Gao |
| Abstract |
Heart Failure (HF) is associated with significantly high morbidity and mortality. We performed a meta-analysis and updated new evidences from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the effects of Tai Chi (TC) in patients with HF. Electronic literature search of Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, China national knowledge infrastructure (CNKI), and Wan Fang Database was conducted from inception of their establishment until 2017. And we also searched Clinical Trials Registries (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ and www.controlled-trials.com) for on-going studies. A total of 11 trials with 656 patients were available for analysis. The results suggested that TC was associated with an obviously improved 6-min walk distance [6MWD, weighted mean difference (WMD) 65.29 m; 95% CI 32.55-98.04] and quality of life (Qol, WMD -11.52 points; 95% CI -16.5 to -6.98) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, WMD 9.94%; 95% CI 6.95 to 12.93). TC was shown to reduce serum B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP, standard mean difference (SMD) -1.08 pg/mL; 95% CI -1.91 to -0.26] and heart rate (HR, WMD -2.52 bpm; 95% CI -3.49 to -1.55). In summary, our meta-analysis demonstrated the clinical evidence about TC for HF is inconclusive. TC could improve 6MWD, Qol and LVEF in patients with HF and may reduce BNP and HR. However, there is a lack of evidence to support TC altering other important long-term clinical outcomes so far. Further larger and more sustainable RCTs are urgently needed to investigate the effects of TC. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 14% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 4% |
| Researcher | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 24 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 14% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 23 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 31 March 2018.
All research outputs
#13,575,211
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#4,727
of 13,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#217,078
of 440,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#118
of 322 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 440,043 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 322 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 62% of its contemporaries.