↓ Skip to main content

The mechanisms by which antidepressants may reduce coronary heart disease risk

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
The mechanisms by which antidepressants may reduce coronary heart disease risk
Published in
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12872-015-0074-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marc J. Mathews, Edward H. Mathews, Leon Liebenberg

Abstract

Depression is known to increase the risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) likely through various pathogenetic actions. Understanding the links between depression and CHD and the effects of mediating these links may prove beneficial in CHD prevention. An integrated model of CHD was used to elucidate pathogenetic pathways of importance between depression and CHD. Using biomarker relative risk data the pathogenetic effects are representable as measurable effects based on changes in biomarkers. A 'connection graph' presents interactions by illustrating the relationship between depression and the biomarkers of CHD. The use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) is postulated to have potential to decrease CHD risk. Comparing the 'connection graph' of SSRI's to that of depression elucidates the possible actions through which risk reduction may occur. The CHD effects of depression appear to be driven by increased inflammation and altered metabolism. These effects might be mediated with the use of SSRI's.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 13%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 17 28%
Unknown 14 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 41%
Psychology 4 7%
Engineering 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 15 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 05 August 2015.
All research outputs
#13,343,646
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#558
of 1,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,619
of 264,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#4
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 264,249 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.