↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
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
Cardiac arrest is a predictor of difficult tracheal intubation independent of operator experience in hospitalized patients
Published in
BMC Anesthesiology, May 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2253-14-38
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Placement of advanced airways has been associated with worsened neurologic outcome in survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. These findings have been attributed to factors such as inexperienced operators, prolonged intubation times and other airway related complications. As an initial step to examine outcomes of advanced airway placement during in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA), where immediate assistance and experienced operators are continuously available, we examined whether cardiopulmonary resuscitation efforts affect intubation difficulty. Additionally, we examined whether or not the use of videolaryngoscopy increases the odds of first attempt intubation success compared with traditional direct laryngoscopy.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 13%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Postgraduate 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 10 21%
Unknown 13 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Unknown 16 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 June 2014.
All research outputs
#13,060,804
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#374
of 1,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,775
of 226,260 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,490 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 226,260 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.