↓ Skip to main content

Oxygen use in acute myocardial infarction: an online survey of health professionals' practice and beliefs

Overview of attention for article published in Emergency Medicine Journal, April 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users
reddit
1 Redditor
guideline
3 clinical guideline sources

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Oxygen use in acute myocardial infarction: an online survey of health professionals' practice and beliefs
Published in
Emergency Medicine Journal, April 2010
DOI 10.1136/emj.2009.077370
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

There is growing interest in the safety of oxygen therapy in emergency patients. A Cochrane review of oxygen versus air for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) showed a potentially important, but statistically non-significant, increase in mortality (RR 3.03 (95% CI 0.93 to 9.83)) and concluded a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) was needed.

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 2 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 75 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 States 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Austria 1 1%
Unknown 72 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 9 12%
Student > Master 8 11%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 20%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 10 13%
Attention Score in Context

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 21 December 2021.
All research outputs
#2,693,178
of 34,457,357 outputs
Outputs from Emergency Medicine Journal
#829
of 4,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,936
of 147,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emergency Medicine Journal
#4
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,457,357 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,946 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 147,437 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.