↓ Skip to main content

Prognostication after cardiac arrest

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
174 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
8 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
362 Mendeley
Title
Prognostication after cardiac arrest
Published in
Critical Care, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13054-018-2060-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudio Sandroni, Sonia D’Arrigo, Jerry P. Nolan

Abstract

Hypoxic-ischaemic brain injury (HIBI) is the main cause of death in patients who are comatose after resuscitation from cardiac arrest. A poor neurological outcome-defined as death from neurological cause, persistent vegetative state, or severe neurological disability-can be predicted in these patients by assessing the severity of HIBI. The most commonly used indicators of severe HIBI include bilateral absence of corneal and pupillary reflexes, bilateral absence of N2O waves of short-latency somatosensory evoked potentials, high blood concentrations of neuron specific enolase, unfavourable patterns on electroencephalogram, and signs of diffuse HIBI on computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging of the brain. Current guidelines recommend performing prognostication no earlier than 72 h after return of spontaneous circulation in all comatose patients with an absent or extensor motor response to pain, after having excluded confounders such as residual sedation that may interfere with clinical examination. A multimodal approach combining multiple prognostication tests is recommended so that the risk of a falsely pessimistic prediction is minimised.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 174 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 362 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 362 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 50 14%
Student > Bachelor 39 11%
Researcher 36 10%
Student > Postgraduate 32 9%
Student > Master 30 8%
Other 70 19%
Unknown 105 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 166 46%
Neuroscience 18 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 4%
Engineering 7 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 32 9%
Unknown 118 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 141. 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 25 January 2024.
All research outputs
#299,395
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#151
of 6,644 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,514
of 346,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#6
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,644 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 346,354 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.