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 |
Outcome and prognosis of hypoxic brain damage patients undergoing neurological early rehabilitation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-015-1175-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ute E Heinz, Jens D Rollnik |
| Abstract |
The prevalence of patients suffering from hypoxic brain damage is increasing. Long-term outcome data and prognostic factors for either poor or good outcome are lacking. This retrospective study included 93 patients with hypoxic brain damage undergoing neurological early rehabilitation [length of stay: 108.5 (81.9) days]. Clinical data, validated outcome scales (e.g. Barthel Index-BI, Early Rehabilitation Index-ERI, Glasgow Coma Scale-GCS, Coma Remission Scale-CRS), neuroimaging data, electroencephalography (EEG) and evoked potentials were analyzed. 75.3% had a poor outcome (defined as BI <50). 38 (40.9%) patients were discharged to a nursing care facility, 21 (22.6%) to subsequent rehabilitation, 17 (18.3%) returned home, 9 (9.7%) needed further acute-care hospital treatment and 8 (8.6%) died. Barthel Index on admission as well as coma length were strong predictors of outcome from hypoxic brain damage. In addition, duration of vegetative instability, prolongation of wave III in visual evoked potentials (flash VEP), theta and delta rhythm in EEG, ERI, GCS and CRS on admission were related to poor outcome. All patients with bilateral hypodensities of the basal ganglia belonged to the poor outcome group. Age had no independent influence on functional status at discharge. As with other studies on neurological rehabilitation, functional status on admission turned out to be a strong predictor of outcome from hypoxic brain damage. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| 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 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 111 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 14 | 13% |
| Researcher | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 11% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Other | 21 | 19% |
| Unknown | 26 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 30% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 8% |
| Psychology | 9 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 11% |
| Unknown | 32 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 19 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,663,674
of 25,744,802 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#189
of 4,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,041
of 278,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#4
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,744,802 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 278,449 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 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 95% of its contemporaries.