↓ Skip to main content

Recommendations for the Critical Care Management of Devastating Brain Injury: Prognostication, Psychosocial, and Ethical Management

Overview of attention for article published in Neurocritical Care, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
150 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
205 Mendeley
Title
Recommendations for the Critical Care Management of Devastating Brain Injury: Prognostication, Psychosocial, and Ethical Management
Published in
Neurocritical Care, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s12028-015-0137-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J. Souter, Patricia A. Blissitt, Sandralee Blosser, Jordan Bonomo, David Greer, Draga Jichici, Dea Mahanes, Evie G. Marcolini, Charles Miller, Kiranpal Sangha, Susan Yeager

Abstract

Devastating brain injuries (DBIs) profoundly damage cerebral function and frequently cause death. DBI survivors admitted to critical care will suffer both intracranial and extracranial effects from their brain injury. The indicators of quality care in DBI are not completely defined, and despite best efforts many patients will not survive, although others may have better outcomes than originally anticipated. Inaccuracies in prognostication can result in premature termination of life support, thereby biasing outcomes research and creating a self-fulfilling cycle where the predicted course is almost invariably dismal. Because of the potential complexities and controversies involved in the management of devastating brain injury, the Neurocritical Care Society organized a panel of expert clinicians from neurocritical care, neuroanesthesia, neurology, neurosurgery, emergency medicine, nursing, and pharmacy to develop an evidence-based guideline with practice recommendations. The panel intends for this guideline to be used by critical care physicians, neurologists, emergency physicians, and other health professionals, with specific emphasis on management during the first 72-h post-injury. Following an extensive literature review, the panel used the GRADE methodology to evaluate the robustness of the data. They made actionable recommendations based on the quality of evidence, as well as on considerations of risk: benefit ratios, cost, and user preference. The panel generated recommendations regarding prognostication, psychosocial issues, and ethical considerations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 205 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%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 202 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 31 15%
Student > Master 28 14%
Other 19 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 14 7%
Other 56 27%
Unknown 42 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 101 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 11%
Neuroscience 12 6%
Psychology 4 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 1%
Other 15 7%
Unknown 47 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 09 May 2018.
All research outputs
#1,475,259
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Neurocritical Care
#100
of 1,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,724
of 266,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurocritical Care
#1
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,548 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 266,564 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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 95% of its contemporaries.