↓ Skip to main content

Heparin versus normal saline for patency of arterial lines

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
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 (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Heparin versus normal saline for patency of arterial lines
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007364.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suzanne Robertson-Malt, Greg N Malt, Vincent Farquhar, William Greer

Abstract

For most patients who require intensive care, the success of clinical decision making and interventions is dependent on the accuracy of different physiological variables measured or obtained from samples using an arterial catheter. Maintaining the patency of these catheters is therefore essential for obtaining accurate measures, minimizing patient discomfort and reducing expenses incurred when an occluded catheter requires replacement. Uncertainty exists amongst clinicians as to best practice surrounding the contents of the arterial catheter flush solution (heparin or saline). The use of heparin is more expensive and is accompanied by significant risks such as haemorrhage, hypersensitivity and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 57 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 24%
Unspecified 9 15%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 19 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 39%
Unspecified 12 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 20%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 7 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 03 October 2014.
All research outputs
#1,098,098
of 12,347,469 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,832
of 8,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,599
of 196,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#61
of 176 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,347,469 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,443 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 196,482 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 176 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.