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 |
Review article: Part two: Goal‐directed resuscitation – Which goals? Perfusion targets
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Emergency Medicine Australasia, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2011.01515.x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anthony Holley, William Lukin, Jennifer Paratz, Tracey Hawkins, Robert Boots, Jeffrey Lipman |
| Abstract |
Haemodynamic targets, such as cardiac output, mean arterial blood pressure and central venous oxygen saturations, remain crude predictors of tissue perfusion and oxygen supply at a cellular level. Shocked patients may appear adequately resuscitated based on normalization of global vital signs, yet they are still experiencing occult hypoperfusion. If targeted resuscitation is employed, appropriate use of end-points is critical. In this review, we consider the value of directing resuscitation at the microcirculation or cellular level. Current technologies available include sublingual capnometry, video microscopy of the microcirculation and near-infrared spectroscopy providing a measure of tissue oxygenation, whereas base deficit and lactate potentially provide a surrogate measure of the adequacy of global perfusion. The methodology and evidence for these technologies guiding resuscitation are considered in this narrative review. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 60 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 21% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Professor | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 11 | 18% |
| Unknown | 7 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 68% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 11 | 18% |
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 26 February 2013.
All research outputs
#16,722,190
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Emergency Medicine Australasia
#1,465
of 1,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,987
of 251,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emergency Medicine Australasia
#13
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,973 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 251,196 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.