| Title |
A users’ guide to the 2016 Surviving Sepsis Guidelines
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00134-017-4681-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
R. Phillip Dellinger, Christa A. Schorr, Mitchell M. Levy |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 98 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 States | 10 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 7 | 7% |
| Spain | 5 | 5% |
| Mexico | 5 | 5% |
| Japan | 4 | 4% |
| Colombia | 2 | 2% |
| Saudi Arabia | 2 | 2% |
| Belgium | 2 | 2% |
| Ecuador | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 43 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 71 | 72% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 16 | 16% |
| Scientists | 10 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 269 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 263 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 41 | 15% |
| Researcher | 33 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 28 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 23 | 9% |
| Other | 78 | 29% |
| Unknown | 40 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 183 | 68% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 1% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 11 | 4% |
| Unknown | 44 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 68. 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 21 June 2019.
All research outputs
#638,975
of 25,709,917 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#586
of 5,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,488
of 423,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#9
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,709,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,472 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 423,531 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 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 90% of its contemporaries.