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 |
A lesson on induction of hypothermia and measurement of efficacy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-014-0710-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bridget A Harris, Peter JD Andrews |
| Abstract |
Brain injuries caused by stroke are common and costly in human and resource terms. The result of stroke is a cascade of molecular and physiological derangement, cell death, damage and inflammation in the brain. This, together with infection, if present, commonly results in patients having an increased temperature, which is associated with worse outcome. The usual clinical goal in stroke is therefore to reduce temperature to normal, or below normal (hypothermia) to reduce swelling if brain pressure is increased. However, research evidence does not yet conclusively show whether or not cooling patients after stroke improves their longer-term outcome (reduces death and disability). It is possible that complications of cooling outweigh the benefits. Cooling therapy may reduce damage and potentially improve outcome, and head cooling targets the site of injury and may have fewer side effects than systemic cooling, but the evidence base is unclear. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 Kingdom | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 21% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Researcher | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 11 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 39% |
| Engineering | 2 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 23 December 2014.
All research outputs
#14,782,490
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,873
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,713
of 359,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#81
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 359,692 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.