
Almost 20 years ago, Adriaan Versprille published an editorial in this journal to explain why, in his opinion, the calculation of pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) is meaningless [1]. The uncertainties of PVR were underscored a year later by McGregor and Sniderman in the American Journal of Cardiology [2]. Obviously, both papers failed to convince. A Medline search from 1985 to the end of 2002 reveals no less than 7,158 papers with PVR calculations. What is it that could be wrong in all this literature?
Pulmonary Circulation, Cardiologie et circulation, Physiologie générale, Humans, Vascular Resistance, Sciences bio-médicales et agricoles
Pulmonary Circulation, Cardiologie et circulation, Physiologie générale, Humans, Vascular Resistance, Sciences bio-médicales et agricoles
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 63 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
