↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

Prospective and Explicit Clinical Validation of the Ottawa Heart Failure Risk Scale, With and Without Use of Quantitative NT-proBNP

Overview of attention for article published in Academic Emergency Medicine, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#17 of 2,054)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
120 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Prospective and Explicit Clinical Validation of the Ottawa Heart Failure Risk Scale, With and Without Use of Quantitative NT-proBNP
Published in
Academic Emergency Medicine, December 2016
DOI 10.1111/acem.13141
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stiell, Ian G., Perry, Jeffrey J., Clement, Catherine M., Brison, Robert J., Rowe, Brian H., Aaron, Shawn D., McRae, Andrew, Borgundvaag, Bjug, Calder, Lisa A., Forster, Alan J., Wells, George A., Ian G. Stiell, Jeffrey J. Perry, Catherine M. Clement, Robert J. Brison, Brian H. Rowe, Shawn D. Aaron, Andrew McRae, Bjug Borgundvaag, Lisa A. Calder, Alan J. Forster, George A. Wells, McRae, Andrew D.

Abstract

We previously developed the Ottawa Heart Failure Risk Scale (OHFRS) to assist with disposition decisions for acute heart failure patients in the emergency department (ED). We sought to prospectively evaluate the accuracy, acceptability, and potential impact of OHFRS. This prospective observational cohort study was conducted at six tertiary hospital EDs. Patients with acute heart failure were evaluated by ED physicians for the 10 OHFRS criteria and then followed for 30 days. Quantitative NT-proBNP was measured where feasible. Serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as: death within 30 days, admission to monitored unit, intubation, non-invasive ventilation, myocardial infarction, or relapse resulting in hospital admission within 14 days. We enrolled 1,100 patients with mean age 77.7 years. SSOs occurred in 170 (15.5%) cases (19.4% if admitted and 10.2% if discharged). Compared to actual practice, using an admission threshold of OHFRS score >1 would have increased sensitivity (71.8% vs. 91.8%) but increased admissions (57.2% vs. 77.6%). For 684 cases with NT-proBNP values, using a threshold >1 would have significantly increased sensitivity (69.8% vs. 95.8%) while increasing admissions (60.8% vs. 88.0%). In only 11.9% of cases did physicians indicate discomfort with use of OHFRS. Prospective clinical validation found the OHFRS tool to be highly sensitive for SAEs in acute heart failure patients, albeit with an increase in admission rates. When available, NT-proBNP values further improve sensitivity. With adequate physician training, OHFRS should help improve and standardize admission practices, diminishing both unnecessary admissions for low-risk patients and unsafe discharge decisions for high-risk patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 120 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 31%
Other 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Librarian 2 13%
Professor 1 6%
Other 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 69%
Computer Science 2 13%
Unspecified 1 6%
Mathematics 1 6%
Design 1 6%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 127. 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 22 May 2017.
All research outputs
#68,946
of 8,650,672 outputs
Outputs from Academic Emergency Medicine
#17
of 2,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,068
of 247,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic Emergency Medicine
#2
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,650,672 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,054 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 247,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.