Title |
Low-dose steroids in adult septic shock: results of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign
|
---|---|
Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine, October 2012
|
DOI | 10.1007/s00134-012-2720-z |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Brian Casserly, Herwig Gerlach, Gary S. Phillips, Stanley Lemeshow, John C. Marshall, Tiffany M. Osborn, Mitchell M. Levy |
Abstract |
The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) developed guidelines and treatment bundles for the administration of steroids in adult septic shock. However, it is not clear how this has affected clinical practice or patient outcome. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Japan | 4 | 29% |
Australia | 1 | 7% |
United States | 1 | 7% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 7% |
France | 1 | 7% |
Unknown | 6 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 8 | 57% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 43% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Colombia | 2 | 1% |
United States | 2 | 1% |
Brazil | 2 | 1% |
France | 1 | <1% |
Japan | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 131 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 23 | 16% |
Other | 19 | 14% |
Professor | 17 | 12% |
Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 9% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 8% |
Other | 41 | 29% |
Unknown | 16 | 11% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 98 | 70% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 5% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 4% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 1% |
Other | 5 | 4% |
Unknown | 20 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 31 October 2016.
All research outputs
#2,006,073
of 24,396,012 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#1,583
of 5,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,081
of 176,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#3
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,396,012 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 176,239 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 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 95% of its contemporaries.