↓ Skip to main content

Surgical management of left ventricular outflow obstruction in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Overview of attention for article published in Echo Research & Practice, March 2015
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Surgical management of left ventricular outflow obstruction in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
Published in
Echo Research & Practice, March 2015
DOI 10.1530/erp-15-0005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neil Howell, William Bradlow

Abstract

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is the single most common form of inherited heart disease. Left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO) is a recognised feature of this condition which arises when blood leaving the outflow tract is impeded by systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve. In an important minority of patients, breathlessness, chest pain and syncope may result and persist despite the use of medications. In suitable candidates, surgery may relieve obstruction and its associated symptoms, and normalise life expectancy. Refinements in surgical techniques have marked improvements in the understanding of mechanisms underlying LVOTO. In this review, we hope to provide the reader with an understanding of how contemporary surgical practice has developed, which patients should be considered for surgery, and what results are anticipated. The role echocardiography plays in this area is highlighted throughout.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 18%
Other 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 10 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Engineering 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 12 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 04 April 2017.
All research outputs
#4,180,372
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Echo Research & Practice
#96
of 268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,231
of 274,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Echo Research & Practice
#13
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. 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 274,328 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.