| Title |
Prospective, randomized trial comparing fluids and dobutamine optimization of oxygen delivery in high-risk surgical patients [ISRCTN42445141]
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, May 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc4913 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Suzana M Lobo, Francisco R Lobo, Carlos A Polachini, Daniela S Patini, Adriana E Yamamoto, Neymar E de Oliveira, Patricia Serrano, Helder S Sanches, Marco A Spegiorin, Marcio M Queiroz, Antonio C Christiano, Elisangela F Savieiro, Paula A Alvarez, Silvia P Teixeira, Geni S Cunrath |
| Abstract |
Preventing perioperative tissue oxygen debt contributes to a better postoperative recovery. Whether the beneficial effects of fluids and inotropes during optimization of the oxygen delivery index (DO2I) in high-risk patients submitted to major surgeries are due to fluids, to inotropes, or to the combination of the two is not known. We aimed to investigate the effect of DO2I optimization with fluids or with fluids and dobutamine on the 60-day hospital mortality and incidence of complications. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 4 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 115 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 21 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 17 | 14% |
| Researcher | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 11% |
| Other | 29 | 24% |
| Unknown | 11 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 97 | 80% |
| Psychology | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 13 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 31 May 2006.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#5,469
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,315
of 81,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#16
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 81,617 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.