↓ Skip to main content

Recent advances in orthostatic hypotension presenting orthostatic dizziness or vertigo

Overview of attention for article published in Neurological Sciences, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Recent advances in orthostatic hypotension presenting orthostatic dizziness or vertigo
Published in
Neurological Sciences, August 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10072-015-2363-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hyun-Ah Kim, Hyon-Ah Yi, Hyung Lee

Abstract

Orthostatic hypotension (OH), a proxy for sympathetic adrenergic failure, is the most incapacitating sign of autonomic failure. Orthostatic dizziness (OD) is known to be the most common symptom of OH. However, recent studies have demonstrated that 30-39 % of patients with OH experienced rotatory vertigo during upright posture (i.e., orthostatic vertigo, OV), which challenges the dogma that OH induces dizziness and not vertigo. A recent population-based study on spontaneously occurring OD across a wide age range showed that the one-year and lifetime prevalence of OD was 10.9 and 12.5 %, respectively. Approximately 83 % of patients with OD had at least one abnormal autonomic function test result. So far, 11 subtypes of OD have been proposed according to the pattern of autonomic dysfunction, and generalized autonomic failure of sympathetic adrenergic and parasympathetic cardiovagal functions was the most common type. Four different patterns of OH, such as classic, delayed, early, and transient type have been found in patients with OD. The head-up tilt test and Valsalva maneuver should be performed for a comprehensive evaluation of sympathetic adrenergic failure in patients with OD/OV. This review summarizes current advances in OH presenting OD/OV, with a particular focus on the autonomic dysfunction associated with OD.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Korea, Republic of 1 4%
United Kingdom 1 4%
Unknown 24 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 23%
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 12%
Neuroscience 3 12%
Computer Science 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 5 19%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 August 2015.
All research outputs
#21,157,205
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Neurological Sciences
#6
of 6 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,466
of 278,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurological Sciences
#14
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.1. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 278,886 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.