↓ Skip to main content

Clinical review: A review and analysis of heart rate variability and the diagnosis and prognosis of infection

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, November 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
128 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
220 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
Clinical review: A review and analysis of heart rate variability and the diagnosis and prognosis of infection
Published in
Critical Care, November 2009
DOI 10.1186/cc8132
Pubmed ID
Authors

Saif Ahmad, Anjali Tejuja, Kimberley D Newman, Ryan Zarychanski, Andrew JE Seely

Abstract

Bacterial infection leading to organ failure is the most common cause of death in critically ill patients. Early diagnosis and expeditious treatment is a cornerstone of therapy. Evaluating the systemic host response to infection as a complex system provides novel insights: however, bedside application with clinical value remains wanting. Providing an integrative measure of an altered host response, the patterns and character of heart rate fluctuations measured over intervals-in-time may be analysed with a panel of mathematical techniques that quantify overall fluctuation, spectral composition, scale-free variation, and degree of irregularity or complexity. Using these techniques, heart rate variability (HRV) has been documented to be both altered in the presence of systemic infection, and correlated with its severity. In this review and analysis, we evaluate the use of HRV monitoring to provide early diagnosis of infection, document the prognostic implications of altered HRV in infection, identify current limitations, highlight future research challenges, and propose improvement strategies. Given existing evidence and potential for further technological advances, we believe that longitudinal, individualized, and comprehensive HRV monitoring in critically ill patients at risk for or with existing infection offers a means to harness the clinical potential of this bedside application of complex systems science.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 220 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 211 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 44 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 15%
Student > Master 28 13%
Other 17 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 15 7%
Other 55 25%
Unknown 27 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 90 41%
Engineering 33 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 5%
Sports and Recreations 11 5%
Computer Science 11 5%
Other 30 14%
Unknown 33 15%
Attention Score in Context

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 March 2020.
All research outputs
#14,599,900
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,804
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,872
of 177,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#27
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 177,868 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.