↓ Skip to main content

BMJ

Cardiac auscultation poorly predicts the presence of valvular heart disease in asymptomatic primary care patients

Overview of attention for article published in Heart, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
13 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
188 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
73 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
Title
Cardiac auscultation poorly predicts the presence of valvular heart disease in asymptomatic primary care patients
Published in
Heart, May 2018
DOI 10.1136/heartjnl-2018-313082
Pubmed ID
Authors

Syed K M Gardezi, Saul G Myerson, John Chambers, Sean Coffey, Joanna d'Arcy, F D Richard Hobbs, Jonathan Holt, Andrew Kennedy, Margaret Loudon, Anne Prendergast, Anthony Prothero, Joanna Wilson, Bernard D Prendergast

Abstract

Cardiac auscultation is a key clinical skill, particularly for the diagnosis of valvular heart disease (VHD). However, its utility has declined due to the widespread availability of echocardiography and diminishing emphasis on the importance of clinical examination. We aim to determine the contemporary accuracy of auscultation for diagnosing VHD in primary care. Cardiac auscultation was undertaken by one of two experienced general practitioners (primary care/family doctors) in a subset of 251 asymptomatic participants aged >65 years undergoing echocardiography within a large community-based screening study of subjects with no known VHD. Investigators were blinded to the echocardiographic findings. Newly detected VHD was classified as mild (mild regurgitation of any valve or aortic sclerosis) or significant (at least moderate regurgitation or mild stenosis of any valve). Newly identified VHD was common, with mild disease in 170/251 participants (68%) and significant disease in 36/251 (14%). The sensitivity of auscultation was low for the diagnosis of mild VHD (32%) but slightly higher for significant VHD (44%), with specificities of 67% and 69%, respectively. Likelihood ratios were not statistically significant for the diagnosis of either mild or significant VHD in the overall cohort, but showed possible value for auscultation in non-overweight subjects (body mass index <25 kg/m2). Cardiac auscultation has limited accuracy for the detection of VHD in asymptomatic patients and is a poor diagnostic screening tool in primary care, particularly for overweight subjects. Ensuring easy access to echocardiography in patients with symptoms suggesting VHD is likely to represent a better diagnostic strategy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 188 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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Other 9 8%
Unspecified 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Other 25 24%
Unknown 31 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 32%
Unspecified 8 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Computer Science 5 5%
Engineering 4 4%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 38 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 209. 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 04 May 2023.
All research outputs
#189,594
of 25,661,882 outputs
Outputs from Heart
#99
of 6,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,135
of 344,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Heart
#8
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,661,882 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 6,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 344,914 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 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 92% of its contemporaries.