| Title |
The International Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference on Multimodality Monitoring in Neurocritical Care: Evidentiary Tables
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neurocritical Care, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12028-014-0081-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Le Roux, David K. Menon, Giuseppe Citerio, Paul Vespa, Mary Kay Bader, Gretchen Brophy, Michael N. Diringer, Nino Stocchetti, Walter Videtta, Rocco Armonda, Neeraj Badjatia, Julian Bösel, Randall Chesnut, Sherry Chou, Jan Claassen, Marek Czosnyka, Michael De Georgia, Anthony Figaji, Jennifer Fugate, Raimund Helbok, David Horowitz, Peter Hutchinson, Monisha Kumar, Molly McNett, Chad Miller, Andrew Naidech, Mauro Oddo, DaiWai Olson, Kristine O’Phelan, J. Javier Provencio, Corinna Puppo, Richard Riker, Claudia Roberson, Michael Schmidt, Fabio Taccone |
| Abstract |
A variety of technologies have been developed to assist decision-making during the management of patients with acute brain injury who require intensive care. A large body of research has been generated describing these various technologies. The Neurocritical Care Society (NCS) in collaboration with the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), the Society for Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Latin America Brain Injury Consortium (LABIC) organized an international, multidisciplinary consensus conference to perform a systematic review of the published literature to help develop evidence-based practice recommendations on bedside physiologic monitoring. This supplement contains a Consensus Summary Statement with recommendations and individual topic reviews on physiologic processes important in the care of acute brain injury. In this article we provide the evidentiary tables for select topics including systemic hemodynamics, intracranial pressure, brain and systemic oxygenation, EEG, brain metabolism, biomarkers, processes of care and monitoring in emerging economies to provide the clinician ready access to evidence that supports recommendations about neuromonitoring. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 83 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 20 | 24% |
| Unknown | 24 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 47% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 24 | 28% |
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 22 January 2015.
All research outputs
#20,249,662
of 22,778,347 outputs
Outputs from Neurocritical Care
#1,394
of 1,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#295,630
of 351,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurocritical Care
#22
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,778,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,496 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 351,830 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.