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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Clinical use of lactate monitoring in critically ill patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Intensive Care, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2110-5820-3-12 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jan Bakker, Maarten WN Nijsten, Tim C Jansen |
| Abstract |
Increased blood lactate levels (hyperlactataemia) are common in critically ill patients. Although frequently used to diagnose inadequate tissue oxygenation, other processes not related to tissue oxygenation may increase lactate levels. Especially in critically ill patients, increased glycolysis may be an important cause of hyperlactataemia. Nevertheless, the presence of increased lactate levels has important implications for the morbidity and mortality of the hyperlactataemic patients. Although the term lactic acidosis is frequently used, a significant relationship between lactate and pH only exists at higher lactate levels. The term lactate associated acidosis is therefore more appropriate. Two recent studies have underscored the importance of monitoring lactate levels and adjust treatment to the change in lactate levels in early resuscitation. As lactate levels can be measured rapidly at the bedside from various sources, structured lactate measurements should be incorporated in resuscitation protocols. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 14% |
| France | 2 | 7% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Chile | 1 | 4% |
| Portugal | 1 | 4% |
| Kenya | 1 | 4% |
| Kuwait | 1 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 21 | 75% |
| Scientists | 4 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 515 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| Canada | 4 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Pakistan | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | <1% |
| Unknown | 493 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 68 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 65 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 59 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 50 | 10% |
| Researcher | 48 | 9% |
| Other | 124 | 24% |
| Unknown | 101 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 272 | 53% |
| Engineering | 22 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 20 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 3% |
| Other | 49 | 10% |
| Unknown | 120 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 06 December 2020.
All research outputs
#1,329,029
of 25,866,425 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#149
of 1,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,256
of 206,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,866,425 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,220 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 206,842 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 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.