↓ Skip to main content

Ischemic biomarker heart-type fatty acid binding protein (hFABP) in acute heart failure - diagnostic and prognostic insights compared to NT-proBNP and troponin I

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Ischemic biomarker heart-type fatty acid binding protein (hFABP) in acute heart failure - diagnostic and prognostic insights compared to NT-proBNP and troponin I
Published in
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12872-015-0026-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ursula Hoffmann, Florian Espeter, Christel Weiß, Parviz Ahmad-Nejad, Siegfried Lang, Martina Brueckmann, Ibrahim Akin, Michael Neumaier, Martin Borggrefe, Michael Behnes

Abstract

To evaluate diagnostic and long-term prognostic values of hFABP compared to NT-proBNP and troponin I (TnI) in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) suspected of acute heart failure (AHF). 401 patients with acute dyspnea or peripheral edema, 122 suffering from AHF, were prospectively enrolled and followed up to 5 years. hFABP combined with NT-proBNP versus NT-proBNP alone was tested for AHF diagnosis. Prognostic value of hFABP versus TnI was evaluated in models predicting all-cause mortality (ACM) and AHF related rehospitalization (AHF-RH) at 1 and 5 years, including 11 conventional risk factors plus NT-proBNP. Additional hFABP measurements improved diagnostic specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of sole NT-proBNP testing at the cutoff <300 ng/l to "rule out" AHF. Highest hFABP levels (4th quartile) were associated with increased ACM (hazard ratios (HR): 2.1-2.5; p = 0.04) and AHF-RH risk at 5 years (HR 2.8-8.3, p = 0.001). ACM was better characterized in prognostic models including TnI, whereas AHF-RH was better characterized in prognostic models including hFABP. Cox analyses revealed a 2 % increase of ACM risk and 3-7 % increase of AHF-RH risk at 5 years by each unit increase of hFABP of 10 ng/ml. Combining hFABP plus NT-proBNP (<300 ng/l) only improves diagnostic specificity and PPV to rule out AHF. hFABP may improve prognosis for long-term AHF-RH, whereas TnI may improve prognosis for ACM. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00143793 .

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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 15%
Researcher 5 9%
Professor 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 12 23%
Unknown 9 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 13%
Chemistry 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 10 19%

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 16 August 2016.
All research outputs
#4,373,770
of 8,223,523 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#322
of 640 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,420
of 223,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#8
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,223,523 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 640 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 223,072 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.