| Title |
Clinical review: Guyton - the role of mean circulatory filling pressure and right atrial pressure in controlling cardiac output
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, December 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc9247 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
William R Henderson, Donald EG Griesdale, Keith R Walley, A William William Sheel |
| Abstract |
Arthur Guyton's concepts of the determinative role of right heart filling in cardiac output continue to be controversial. This paper reviews his seminal experiments in detail and clarifies the often confusing concepts underpinning his model. One primary criticism of Guyton's model is that the parameters describing venous return had not been measured in a functioning cardiovascular system in humans. Thus, concerns have been expressed in regard to the ability of Guyton's simplistic model, with few parameters, to model the complex human circulation. Further concerns have been raised in regard to the artificial experimental preparations that Guyton used. Recently reported measurements in humans support Guyton's theoretical and animal work. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 20% |
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 202 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 191 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 38 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 29 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 52 | 26% |
| Unknown | 26 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 138 | 68% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 4% |
| Engineering | 7 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 8 | 4% |
| Unknown | 32 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 25 November 2018.
All research outputs
#2,575,344
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,238
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,169
of 190,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#8
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 190,761 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 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.