↓ Skip to main content

Relationship between perioperative semaglutide use and residual gastric content: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing elective upper endoscopy

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, March 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 1,913)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
212 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
45 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
86 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 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
Relationship between perioperative semaglutide use and residual gastric content: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing elective upper endoscopy
Published in
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, March 2023
DOI 10.1016/j.jclinane.2023.111091
Pubmed ID
Authors

Saullo Queiroz Silveira, Leopoldo Muniz da Silva, Arthur de Campos Vieira Abib, Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de Moura, Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de Moura, Leonardo Barbosa Santos, Anthony M-H Ho, Rafael Souza Fava Nersessian, Filipe Lugon Moulin Lima, Marcela Viana Silva, Glenio B Mizubuti

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 81 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 9%
Other 6 7%
Unspecified 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Professor 5 6%
Other 17 21%
Unknown 35 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 32%
Unspecified 6 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 38 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1654. 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 09 July 2024.
All research outputs
#6,902
of 26,310,456 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Anesthesia
#1
of 1,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202
of 430,316 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Anesthesia
#1
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,310,456 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,913 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 430,316 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 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 96% of its contemporaries.