| Title |
Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd000126.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tanat Vaniyapong, Wilaiwan Chongruksut, Kittipan Rerkasem |
| Abstract |
Carotid endarterectomy may significantly reduce the risk of stroke in people with recently symptomatic, severe carotid artery stenosis. However, there are significant perioperative risks that may be reduced by performing the operation under local rather than general anaesthetic. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 1996, and previously updated in 2004 and 2008. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Peru | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 113 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 15% |
| Other | 14 | 12% |
| Researcher | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 9% |
| Other | 16 | 14% |
| Unknown | 26 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 57 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 32 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 January 2014.
All research outputs
#17,348,916
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,493
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,947
of 320,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#207
of 221 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 320,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 221 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.