| Title |
ACCM/PALS haemodynamic support guidelines for paediatric septic shock: an outcomes comparison with and without monitoring central venous oxygen saturation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine, March 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00134-008-1085-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cláudio F. de Oliveira, Débora S. F. de Oliveira, Adriana F. C. Gottschald, Juliana D. G. Moura, Graziela A. Costa, Andréa C. Ventura, José Carlos Fernandes, Flávio A. C. Vaz, Joseph A. Carcillo, Emanuel P. Rivers, Eduardo J. Troster |
| Abstract |
The ACCM/PALS guidelines address early correction of paediatric septic shock using conventional measures. In the evolution of these recommendations, indirect measures of the balance between systemic oxygen delivery and demands using central venous or superior vena cava oxygen saturation (ScvO(2) > or = 70%) in a goal-directed approach have been added. However, while these additional goal-directed endpoints are based on evidence-based adult studies, the extrapolation to the paediatric patient remains unvalidated. |
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% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 284 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 4 | 1% |
| Canada | 3 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 2 | <1% |
| Denmark | 2 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 267 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 48 | 17% |
| Researcher | 36 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 36 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 26 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 7% |
| Other | 79 | 28% |
| Unknown | 38 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 193 | 68% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 14 | 5% |
| Unknown | 42 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 06 April 2022.
All research outputs
#2,484,212
of 23,292,144 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#1,721
of 5,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,886
of 82,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#2
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,292,144 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,049 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 82,021 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.