↓ Skip to main content

Obesity, obstructive sleep apnoea, and diabetes mellitus: anaesthetic implications

Overview of attention for article published in BJA: The British Journal of Anaesthesia, December 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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.
Article details
Title
Obesity, obstructive sleep apnoea, and diabetes mellitus: anaesthetic implications
Published in
BJA: The British Journal of Anaesthesia, December 2009
DOI 10.1093/bja/aep294
Pubmed ID
Authors

K. Candiotti, S. Sharma, R. Shankar

Abstract

Obesity is an epidemic in much of the Western World. The extent of this problem, combined with the increasing preference for ambulatory surgical procedures, has produced a difficult situation for many anaesthesiologists. Even the simplest anaesthetic procedures can become very complicated and potentially difficult in this population. Although there are numerous complications associated with obesity, perhaps obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) and diabetes mellitus are among the more significant. Patients with OSA are often not ideal candidates for certain day-case procedures, but many outpatient procedures can be performed on patients with OSA as long as attention is paid to anaesthetic technique. Diabetic patients are prone to numerous complications in the perioperative period, including cardiac problems, but with careful management, they are able to undergo day-case surgical procedures safely.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
South Africa 2 2%
Germany 2 2%
United States 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 98 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 16%
Student > Postgraduate 12 11%
Student > Master 11 10%
Other 10 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 8%
Other 36 34%
Unknown 11 10%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 73 69%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Unspecified 1 <1%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 15 14%
Attention Score in Context

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 31 May 2011.
All research outputs
#31,096,660
of 34,297,219 outputs
Outputs from BJA: The British Journal of Anaesthesia
#8,472
of 8,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,315
of 239,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BJA: The British Journal of Anaesthesia
#47
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,297,219 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,807 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 239,517 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.