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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Journey of a patient with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Medical Research, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40001-015-0112-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dan Liu, Kai Hu, Heinz-Theo Pelzer, Stefan Störk, Frank Weidemann |
| Abstract |
Right ventricle (RV) dysfunction is a key outcome determinant and a leading cause of death for patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). In this report, we followed the 5-year clinical journey of a patient with CTEPH. The tricuspid pressure gradient was significantly increased in the early phase of CTEPH and "normalized" at the late phase of this patient's clinical journey, but this "normalized" gradient is not a positive treatment response but rather an ominous sign of advancing right heart failure owing to an exhaustion of RV contractile function. Thus, appropriate interpretation of the tricuspid pressure gradient change is of importance for assessing RV dysfunction and treatment outcome during follow-up in patients with CTEPH. Besides systolic pulmonary artery pressure (SPAP), other RV functional parameters such as tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, RV fractional area change, and RV longitudinal strain, together with clinical markers, may provide additional guidance regarding functional improvement or progression in patients with CTEPH. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 11% |
| Researcher | 2 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 7 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 56% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 April 2015.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Medical Research
#440
of 923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,113
of 271,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Medical Research
#12
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 271,149 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.