↓ Skip to main content

Safety of cilostazol in peripheral artery disease: a cohort from a primary healthcare electronic database

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
Safety of cilostazol in peripheral artery disease: a cohort from a primary healthcare electronic database
Published in
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12872-018-0822-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jordi Real, M Catalina Serna, Maria Giner-Soriano, Rosa Forés, Guillem Pera, Esther Ribes, Maite Alzamora, Josep Ramon Marsal, Antonio Heras, Rosa Morros

Abstract

Cilostazol has been associated with spontaneous reports of cardiovascular adverse events and serious bleeding. The objective of this study is to determine the relative risk of cardiovascular adverse events or haemorrhages in patients with peripheral artery disease treated with cilostazol in comparison to pentoxifylline users. Population-based cohort study including all individuals older than 40 who initiated cilostazol or pentoxifylline during 2009-2011 in SIDIAP database. The two treatment groups were matched through propensity score (PS). Nine thousand one hundred twenty-nine patients met inclusion criteria and after PS matching, there were 2905 patients in each group. 76% of patients were men, with similar mean ages in both groups (68.8 for cilostazol and 69.4 for pentoxifylline). There were no differences in bleeding, cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events between both groups. Patients treated with cilostazol were different from those treated with pentoxifylline at baseline, so they were matched through PS. We did not find differences between treatment groups in the incidence of bleeding or cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. Cilostazol should be used with precaution in elderly polymedicated patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 11%
Student > Master 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 24 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 7%
Psychology 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 28 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 May 2018.
All research outputs
#6,820,984
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#362
of 1,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,252
of 327,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#9
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,640 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 327,709 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.