↓ Skip to main content

Residual macrovascular risk in 2013: what have we learned?

Overview of attention for article published in Cardiovascular Diabetology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
157 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
133 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
Residual macrovascular risk in 2013: what have we learned?
Published in
Cardiovascular Diabetology, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1475-2840-13-26
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-Charles Fruchart, Jean Davignon, Michel P Hermans, Khalid Al-Rubeaan, Pierre Amarenco, Gerd Assmann, Philip Barter, John Betteridge, Eric Bruckert, Ada Cuevas, Michel Farnier, Ele Ferrannini, Paola Fioretto, Jacques Genest, Henry N Ginsberg, Antonio M Gotto, Dayi Hu, Takashi Kadowaki, Tatsuhiko Kodama, Michel Krempf, Yuji Matsuzawa, Jesús Millán Núñez-Cortés, Carlos Calvo Monfil, Hisao Ogawa, Jorge Plutzky, Daniel J Rader, Shaukat Sadikot, Raul D Santos, Evgeny Shlyakhto, Piyamitr Sritara, Rody Sy, Alan Tall, Chee Eng Tan, Lale Tokgözoğlu, Peter P Toth, Paul Valensi, Christoph Wanner, Alberto Zambon, Junren Zhu, Paul Zimmet, for the Residual Risk Reduction Initiative (R3i)

Abstract

Cardiovascular disease poses a major challenge for the 21st century, exacerbated by the pandemics of obesity, metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes. While best standards of care, including high-dose statins, can ameliorate the risk of vascular complications, patients remain at high risk of cardiovascular events. The Residual Risk Reduction Initiative (R3i) has previously highlighted atherogenic dyslipidaemia, defined as the imbalance between proatherogenic triglyceride-rich apolipoprotein B-containing-lipoproteins and antiatherogenic apolipoprotein A-I-lipoproteins (as in high-density lipoprotein, HDL), as an important modifiable contributor to lipid-related residual cardiovascular risk, especially in insulin-resistant conditions. As part of its mission to improve awareness and clinical management of atherogenic dyslipidaemia, the R3i has identified three key priorities for action: i) to improve recognition of atherogenic dyslipidaemia in patients at high cardiometabolic risk with or without diabetes; ii) to improve implementation and adherence to guideline-based therapies; and iii) to improve therapeutic strategies for managing atherogenic dyslipidaemia. The R3i believes that monitoring of non-HDL cholesterol provides a simple, practical tool for treatment decisions regarding the management of lipid-related residual cardiovascular risk. Addition of a fibrate, niacin (North and South America), omega-3 fatty acids or ezetimibe are all options for combination with a statin to further reduce non-HDL cholesterol, although lacking in hard evidence for cardiovascular outcome benefits. Several emerging treatments may offer promise. These include the next generation peroxisome proliferator-activated receptorα agonists, cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors and monoclonal antibody therapy targeting proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9. However, long-term outcomes and safety data are clearly needed. In conclusion, the R3i believes that ongoing trials with these novel treatments may help to define the optimal management of atherogenic dyslipidaemia to reduce the clinical and socioeconomic burden of residual cardiovascular risk.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 128 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 12%
Student > Postgraduate 14 11%
Student > Master 12 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 6%
Other 34 26%
Unknown 29 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Unspecified 5 4%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 39 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 16 December 2019.
All research outputs
#2,811,524
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from Cardiovascular Diabetology
#179
of 1,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,027
of 306,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cardiovascular Diabetology
#4
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,369 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 306,106 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.