↓ Skip to main content

Remifentanil-based total intravenous anesthesia for pediatric rigid bronchoscopy: comparison of adjuvant propofol and ketamine

Overview of attention for article published in Clinics, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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.
Title
Remifentanil-based total intravenous anesthesia for pediatric rigid bronchoscopy: comparison of adjuvant propofol and ketamine
Published in
Clinics, June 2014
DOI 10.6061/clinics/2014(06)01
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mefkur Bakan, Ufuk Topuz, Tarik Umutoglu, Gokhan Gundogdu, Zekeriya Ilce, Mehmet Elicevik, Guner Kaya

Abstract

Laryngoscopy and stimuli inside the trachea cause an intense sympatho-adrenal response. Remifentanil seems to be the optimal opioid for rigid bronchoscopy due to its potent and short-acting properties. The purpose of this study was to compare bolus propofol and ketamine as an adjuvant to remifentanil-based total intravenous anesthesia for pediatric rigid bronchoscopy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 13 21%
Unknown 20 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Sports and Recreations 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 18 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 04 August 2020.
All research outputs
#7,960,512
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#299
of 1,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,815
of 240,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,215 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. 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 240,964 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.