↓ Skip to main content

Review article: Part one: Goal‐directed resuscitation – Which goals? Haemodynamic targets

Overview of attention for article published in Emergency Medicine Australasia, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Review article: Part one: Goal‐directed resuscitation – Which goals? Haemodynamic targets
Published in
Emergency Medicine Australasia, January 2012
DOI 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2011.01516.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anthony Holley, William Lukin, Jennifer Paratz, Tracey Hawkins, Robert Boots, Jeffrey Lipman

Abstract

The use of appropriate resuscitation targets or end-points may facilitate early detection and appropriate management of shock. There is a fine balance between oxygen delivery and consumption, and when this is perturbed, an oxygen debt is generated. In this narrative review, we explore the value of global haemodynamic resuscitation end-points, including pulse rate, blood pressure, central venous pressure and mixed/central venous oxygen saturations. The evidence supporting the reliability of these parameters as end-points for guiding resuscitation and their potential limitations are evaluated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 4%
United Kingdom 2 3%
Canada 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Unknown 64 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 15 21%
Other 12 17%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Professor 5 7%
Other 18 25%
Unknown 6 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 82%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Neuroscience 1 1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 February 2013.
All research outputs
#16,580,157
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Emergency Medicine Australasia
#1,442
of 1,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,791
of 251,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emergency Medicine Australasia
#12
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,973 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 251,197 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.