↓ Skip to main content

Neurologic Complications of Transplantation

Overview of attention for article published in Neurocritical Care, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
Neurologic Complications of Transplantation
Published in
Neurocritical Care, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12028-017-0387-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rajat Dhar

Abstract

Neurologic disturbances including encephalopathy, seizures, and focal deficits complicate the course 10-30% of patients undergoing organ or stem cell transplantation. While much or this morbidity is multifactorial and often associated with extra-cerebral dysfunction (e.g., graft dysfunction, metabolic derangements), immunosuppressive drugs also contribute significantly. This can either be through direct toxicity (e.g., posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome from calcineurin inhibitors such as tacrolimus in the acute postoperative period) or by facilitating opportunistic infections in the months after transplantation. Other neurologic syndromes such as akinetic mutism and osmotic demyelination may also occur. While much of this neurologic dysfunction may be reversible if related to metabolic factors or drug toxicity (and the etiology is recognized and reversed), cases of multifocal cerebral infarction, hemorrhage, or infection may have poor outcomes. As transplant patients survive longer, delayed infections (such as progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy) and post-transplant malignancies are increasingly reported.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Researcher 5 9%
Other 5 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 9%
Other 11 20%
Unknown 17 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 48%
Neuroscience 5 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 19 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 07 October 2019.
All research outputs
#5,061,929
of 24,598,501 outputs
Outputs from Neurocritical Care
#492
of 1,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,046
of 315,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurocritical Care
#2
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,598,501 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,661 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 315,842 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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.