↓ Skip to main content

Update on the NCEP ATP-III emerging cardiometabolic risk factors

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

5 tweeters
6 Wikipedia pages


56 Dimensions

Readers on

156 Mendeley
Update on the NCEP ATP-III emerging cardiometabolic risk factors
Published in
BMC Medicine, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-12-115
Pubmed ID

Robert H Eckel, Marc-Andre Cornier


The intent of this review is to update the science of emerging cardiometabolic risk factors that were listed in the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel-III (ATP-III) report of 2001 (updated in 2004). At the time these guidelines were published, the evidence was felt to be insufficient to recommend these risk factors for routine screening of cardiovascular disease risk. However, the panel felt that prudent use of these biomarkers for patients at intermediate risk of a major cardiovascular event over the subsequent 10 years might help identify patients who needed more aggressive low density lipoprotein (LDL) or non-high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol lowering therapy. While a number of other emerging risk factors have been identified, this review will be limited to assessing the data and recommendations for the use of apolipoprotein B, lipoprotein (a), homocysteine, pro-thrombotic factors, inflammatory factors, impaired glucose metabolism, and measures of subclinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease for further cardiovascular disease risk stratification.

Twitter Demographics

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters 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 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 154 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 17%
Student > Bachelor 21 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 15 10%
Student > Postgraduate 14 9%
Researcher 12 8%
Other 30 19%
Unknown 38 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 77 49%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 12 8%
Unknown 44 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 12 November 2022.
All research outputs
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
of 3,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 237,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 237,188 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.