↓ Skip to main content

Sepsis and Thrombosis.

Overview of attention for article published in Seminars in Thrombosis & Hemostasis, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Sepsis and Thrombosis.
Published in
Seminars in Thrombosis & Hemostasis, April 2013
DOI 10.1055/s-0033-1343894
Pubmed ID
Authors

Levi M, Schultz M, van der Poll T

Abstract

Activation of coagulation frequently occurs in severe infection and sepsis and may contribute to the development of thrombosis. Coagulation abnormalities in sepsis range from a small decrease in platelet count and subclinical prolongation of global clotting times to fulminant disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), characterized by simultaneous widespread microvascular thrombosis and profuse bleeding from various sites. Septic patients with severe forms of DIC may present with manifest thromboembolic disease or clinically less apparent microvascular fibrin deposition, which predominantly presents as multiple organ dysfunction. Thrombophilia is associated with a prohemostatic state and consequently with an increased tendency to develop thrombosis. Hypothetically, patients with thrombophilia may suffer from more severe coagulopathy in case of severe infection or sepsis, which may result in a more serious clinical course and an unfavorable outcome. On the basis of the knowledge of the pathogenesis of thrombosis in severe inflammation and sepsis, strategies aimed at the inhibition of coagulation activation have been developed and have been found favorable in experimental and clinical studies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Denmark 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
Austria 1 2%
Unknown 45 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Student > Master 6 12%
Other 4 8%
Other 17 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 71%
Unspecified 6 12%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 2 4%

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 26 October 2014.
All research outputs
#1,866,520
of 4,507,652 outputs
Outputs from Seminars in Thrombosis & Hemostasis
#62
of 148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,683
of 124,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Seminars in Thrombosis & Hemostasis
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,652 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 57th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 148 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 124,821 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.