↓ Skip to main content

Frailty in advanced heart failure: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Heart Failure Reviews, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
Title
Frailty in advanced heart failure: a systematic review
Published in
Heart Failure Reviews, May 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10741-015-9493-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sunita R. Jha, Hakeem S. K. Ha, Louise D. Hickman, Malin Hannu, Patricia M. Davidson, Peter S. Macdonald, Phillip J. Newton

Abstract

Frailty is a common geriatric syndrome of increased vulnerability to adverse events. The prevalence of frailty among chronic heart failure (CHF) is high and confers a greater risk of adverse events including falls, hospitalisation and mortality. There have been few studies assessing frailty in CHF. A review of the key databases was conducted from 2004 to 2014 including the key search terms 'frail elderly' and 'heart failure'. The following electronic databases were searched: Medline, Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health and Academic Search Complete, with reference lists being manually searched. Articles were included if frailty was assessed using a valid measuring tool in a population with a confirmed diagnosis of CHF. The search yielded a total of 393 articles with 8 articles being selected for review. The prevalence of frailty among those with CHF was high, ranging from 18 to 54 %. The frailty phenotype and geriatric assessments tools were the most common frailty measures utilised; high rates of co-morbidity, hospitalisation and mortality were identified. Frailty is common in CHF and is associated with adverse outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 3 4%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 72 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 21%
Unspecified 11 14%
Other 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Master 8 11%
Other 22 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 55%
Unspecified 16 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Computer Science 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 6 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 03 March 2019.
All research outputs
#3,339,688
of 13,020,564 outputs
Outputs from Heart Failure Reviews
#52
of 294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,071
of 230,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Heart Failure Reviews
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,020,564 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 294 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 230,388 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 63% of its contemporaries.