| Title |
Less invasive hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00134-016-4375-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jean-Louis Teboul, Bernd Saugel, Maurizio Cecconi, Daniel De Backer, Christoph K. Hofer, Xavier Monnet, Azriel Perel, Michael R. Pinsky, Daniel A. Reuter, Andrew Rhodes, Pierre Squara, Jean-Louis Vincent, Thomas W. Scheeren |
| Abstract |
Over the last decade, the way to monitor hemodynamics at the bedside has evolved considerably in the intensive care unit as well as in the operating room. The most important evolution has been the declining use of the pulmonary artery catheter along with the growing use of echocardiography and of continuous, real-time, minimally or totally non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring techniques. This article, which is the result of an agreement between authors belonging to the Cardiovascular Dynamics Section of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, discusses the advantages and limits of using such techniques with an emphasis on their respective place in the hemodynamic management of critically ill patients with hemodynamic instability. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 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 | 4 | 13% |
| Italy | 4 | 13% |
| Vietnam | 3 | 9% |
| Mexico | 2 | 6% |
| Australia | 2 | 6% |
| Fiji | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 3% |
| Hungary | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 28% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 53% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 22% |
| Scientists | 5 | 16% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 362 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 355 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 42 | 12% |
| Researcher | 40 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 38 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 36 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 24 | 7% |
| Other | 84 | 23% |
| Unknown | 98 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 206 | 57% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 5% |
| Engineering | 13 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 1% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | <1% |
| Other | 13 | 4% |
| Unknown | 105 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 16 May 2022.
All research outputs
#2,061,162
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#1,641
of 5,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,458
of 316,285 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#10
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 316,285 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.