↓ Skip to main content

Cardiovascular risk factors and frontotemporal dementia: a case–control study

Overview of attention for article published in Translational Neurodegeneration, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#18 of 239)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Cardiovascular risk factors and frontotemporal dementia: a case–control study
Published in
Translational Neurodegeneration, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/2047-9158-3-13
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angel Golimstok, Nuria Cámpora, Juan I Rojas, María C Fernandez, Cristina Elizondo, Enrique Soriano, Edgardo Cristiano

Abstract

Cardiovascular risk factors (CRF) were widely described as related to dementia. There are very few studies regarding this association in FTD. The objective of the study was to compare the frequency of CRF in our population with FTD and controls. 100 consecutive subjects with FTD diagnosis according to Lund-Manchester clinical criteria and 200 controls matched by age and sex were included between January 2003 to February 2007 at the Cognitive and Behavior Unit of Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires. Clinical evaluation, laboratory tests, brain images (CT/MRI), neuropsychological and neuropsychiatric assessment were performed. Multiple regression analysis was performed to analyze the association in CRF between FTD patients vs. controls. The mean age in FTD was 69.7 ± 0.9 vs. 70.1 ± 0.8 in controls (p 0.12). No difference in gender was observed between cases and controls. No differences were identified between patients and controls regarding hypertension (HTA) (65% vs. 67,3% p 0.44); dyslipidemia (57% vs. 54.7% p 0.74); obesity (39% vs. 27.6% p 0.14) and hypothyroidism (26% vs. 17.1% p 0.1). A significant difference was observed for Diabetes Mellitus (39% vs. 22.6% p 0.001). In our population, Diabetes Mellitus was associated as an independent risk factor for FTD. To our knowledge this is the first report in which CRF were evaluated prospectively in FTD patients. More studies are needed to confirm this finding in larger populations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 21%
Student > Master 12 20%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 38%
Psychology 7 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 15 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 30 August 2020.
All research outputs
#1,208,654
of 18,772,620 outputs
Outputs from Translational Neurodegeneration
#18
of 239 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,152
of 197,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Translational Neurodegeneration
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,772,620 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 239 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 197,750 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them