↓ Skip to main content

On-Site Treatment of Snow Avalanche Victims: From Bench to Mountainside

Overview of attention for article published in High Altitude Medicine & Biology, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
On-Site Treatment of Snow Avalanche Victims: From Bench to Mountainside
Published in
High Altitude Medicine & Biology, September 2018
DOI 10.1089/ham.2018.0036
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Strapazzon Giacomo and Hermann Brugger. On-site treatment of snow avalanche victims: From bench to bedside. High Alt Med Biol. 00:000-000, 2018.-The number of avalanche accidents involving winter recreationists has notably increased in recent decades due to the increasing popularity of outdoor winter activities. The International Liaison Committee on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, the International Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR Medcom), and the Wilderness Medical Society have recently published evidenced-based recommendations for the on-site treatment of snow avalanche victims. Despite these recommendations, recent studies found poor knowledge and compliance by both healthcare providers and laypersons. The aim of this nonsystematic review is to provide an updated overview of avalanche accident epidemiology, to present recent advances in snow avalanche pathophysiology, and to discuss recent advancements in on-site treatment of snow avalanche victims.

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 27 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 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Professor 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 6 22%
Unknown 7 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 11%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 10 37%
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 02 October 2018.
All research outputs
#23,664,582
of 29,756,733 outputs
Outputs from High Altitude Medicine & Biology
#434
of 647 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,685
of 354,109 outputs
Outputs of similar age from High Altitude Medicine & Biology
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,756,733 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 647 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 354,109 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.