| Title |
Muscle relaxant effects on insertion efficacy of the laryngeal mask ProSeal® in anesthetized patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Anesthesia, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00540-015-1982-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Atsushi Fujiwara, Nobuyasu Komasawa, Isao Nishihara, Shinichiro Miyazaki, Shinichi Tatsumi, Wataru Nishimura, Toshiaki Minami |
| Abstract |
Anesthesiologists often encounter LMA-ProSeal(®) (ProSeal) insertion difficulty due to its large cuff size. We performed a randomized clinical trial to examine how insertion efficacy and sealing pressure of ProSeal are affected by muscle relaxant administration in anesthetized patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 28% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 17% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 21% |
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 19 December 2022.
All research outputs
#14,520,230
of 23,879,989 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Anesthesia
#362
of 863 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,538
of 363,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Anesthesia
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,879,989 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 863 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 363,593 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.