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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Monitoring with Head-Mounted Displays: Performance and Safety in a Full-Scale Simulator and Part-Task Trainer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Anesthesia and analgesia, October 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181b5a200 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Liu, Simon A. Jenkins, Penelope M. Sanderson, Marcus O. Watson, Terrence Leane, Amanda Kruys, W John Russell |
| Abstract |
Head-mounted displays (HMDs) can help anesthesiologists with intraoperative monitoring by keeping patients' vital signs within view at all times, even while the anesthesiologist is busy performing procedures or unable to see the monitor. The anesthesia literature suggests that there are advantages of HMD use, but research into head-up displays in the cockpit suggests that HMDs may exacerbate inattentional blindness (a tendency for users to miss unexpected but salient events in the field of view) and may introduce perceptual issues relating to focal depth. We investigated these issues in two simulator-based experiments. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
| Turkey | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 87 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 20% |
| Unknown | 25 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 34% |
| Engineering | 8 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 5% |
| Psychology | 5 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 30 | 32% |
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 22 December 2013.
All research outputs
#16,046,765
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Anesthesia and analgesia
#5,627
of 8,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,306
of 106,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Anesthesia and analgesia
#44
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 8,087 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 106,406 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.