| Title |
Recommendations on the use of EEG monitoring in critically ill patients: consensus statement from the neurointensive care section of the ESICM
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00134-013-2938-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jan Claassen, Fabio S. Taccone, Peter Horn, Martin Holtkamp, Nino Stocchetti, Mauro Oddo |
| Abstract |
Recommendations for EEG monitoring in the ICU are lacking. The Neurointensive Care Section of the ESICM assembled a multidisciplinary group to establish consensus recommendations on the use of EEG in the ICU. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 27% |
| United States | 2 | 13% |
| Belgium | 1 | 7% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 53% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 356 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 348 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 55 | 15% |
| Other | 44 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 36 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 31 | 9% |
| Other | 100 | 28% |
| Unknown | 59 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 196 | 55% |
| Neuroscience | 40 | 11% |
| Engineering | 9 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 1% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 5 | 1% |
| Other | 27 | 8% |
| Unknown | 74 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 30 November 2021.
All research outputs
#1,881,497
of 24,213,825 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#1,504
of 5,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,605
of 196,654 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#4
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,213,825 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,217 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 196,654 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 39 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 92% of its contemporaries.