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 |
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 . |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| China | 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 13% |
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Professor | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 21% |
| Unknown | 19 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 15% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 20 | 28% |
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
#15,336,434
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#832
of 1,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,678
of 264,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#12
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,608 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 264,495 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.