↓ Skip to main content

Debate: does it matter how you lower blood pressure?

Overview of attention for article published in Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine, March 2001
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 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
Debate: does it matter how you lower blood pressure?
Published in
Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine, March 2001
DOI 10.1186/cvm-2-2-063
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gordon T McInnes

Abstract

The evidence base for drug treatment of hypertension is strong. Early trials using thiazide diuretics suggested a shortfall in prevention of coronary heart disease. The superiority of newer drugs has been widely advocated but trial evidence does not support an advantage of beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, calcium channel blockers or alpha-blockers for this outcome. Even meta-analyses have failed to clarify matters. If this issue is to be settled, bigger and better trials of longer duration in high-risk patients are needed. Meanwhile, the importance of rigorous blood pressure control using multiple drugs has been established. This should be the focus of our attention rather than agonising over differences in cause-specific outcomes that may not be generalisable to all patient populations.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 17%
Unknown 5 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 33%
Other 2 33%
Student > Master 1 17%
Unknown 1 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 50%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 17%
Unknown 1 17%

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 22 November 2016.
All research outputs
#4,393,156
of 14,427,757 outputs
Outputs from Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine
#12
of 23 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,481
of 276,670 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,427,757 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one scored the same or higher as 11 of them.
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 276,670 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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