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 |
Classifying types of disseminated intravascular coagulation: clinical and animal models
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Intensive Care, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2052-0492-2-20 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hidesaku Asakura |
| Abstract |
Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) has a common pathogenesis in terms of persistent widespread activation of coagulation in the presence of underlying disease, but the degree of fibrinolytic activation often differs by DIC type. DIC with suppressed fibrinolysis is a DIC type usually seen in sepsis. Coagulation activation is severe, but fibrinolytic activation is mild. DIC with enhanced fibrinolysis is a DIC type usually seen in acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). Both coagulation activation and fibrinolytic activation are severe. DIC with balanced fibrinolysis is a DIC type usually seen in solid tumors, with an intermediate pathogenesis between the above two types. In animal DIC models, lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced models are similar to suppressed-fibrinolytic-type DIC, whereas tissue factor (TF)-induced models are similar to enhanced fibrinolytic/balanced fibrinolytic DIC. Appropriate diagnosis and treatment may also differ depending on the DIC type. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 25% |
| Kuwait | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 158 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 16% |
| Other | 19 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 11% |
| Researcher | 15 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 9% |
| Other | 24 | 15% |
| Unknown | 45 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 71 | 44% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 5 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Unknown | 52 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 June 2021.
All research outputs
#13,915,695
of 22,756,196 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
#339
of 511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,226
of 221,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
#7
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,756,196 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 511 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 221,388 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.