↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Consensus Report by the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators and Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplant Consortium Joint Working Committees on Supportive Care Guidelines for Management of Veno-Occlusive Disease in Children and Adolescents: Part 2—Focus on Ascites, Fluid and Electrolytes, Renal, and Transfusion Issues
Published in
Biology of Blood & Marrow Transplantation, August 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.bbmt.2017.08.014
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Even though hepatic veno-occlusive disease (VOD) is a potentially fatal complication of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), there is paucity of research in the management of the associated multi-organ dysfunction. To help provided standardized care for the management of these patients, the HCT subgroup of the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators (PALISI) and the supportive care committee of the Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplant Consortium (PBMTC), collaborated to develop evidence based consensus guidelines. After an extensive literature search, in part 2 of this series the management of fluids, electrolytes and renal dysfunction; ascites and pleural effusion; and transfusion and coagulopathy issues in patients with VOD are discussed. The evidence available is presented using the GRADE criteria.

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 6 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 72 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 %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Master 5 7%
Researcher 5 7%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 31 43%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 32 44%
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 27 May 2021.
All research outputs
#12,442,446
of 34,565,638 outputs
Outputs from Biology of Blood & Marrow Transplantation
#1,966
of 3,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,316
of 358,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology of Blood & Marrow Transplantation
#34
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,565,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,754 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 358,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.