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 |
Effect of the Cardio First Angel™ device on CPR indices: a randomized controlled clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-016-1296-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amir Vahedian-Azimi, Mohammadreza Hajiesmaeili, Ali Amirsavadkouhi, Hamidreza Jamaati, Morteza Izadi, Seyed J. Madani, Seyed M. R. Hashemian, Andrew C. Miller |
| Abstract |
A number of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) adjunct devices have been developed to improve the consistency and quality of manual chest compressions. We investigated whether a CPR feedback device would improve CPR quality and consistency, as well as patient survival. We conducted a randomized controlled study of patients undergoing CPR for cardiac arrest in the mixed medical-surgical intensive care units of four academic teaching hospitals. Patients were randomized to receive either standard manual CPR or CPR using the Cardio First Angel™ CPR feedback device. Recorded variables included guideline adherence, CPR quality, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rates, and CPR-associated morbidity. A total of 229 subjects were randomized; 149 were excluded; and 80 were included. Patient demographics were similar. Adherence to published CPR guidelines and CPR quality was significantly improved in the intervention group (p < 0.0001), as were ROSC rates (72 % vs. 35 %; p = 0.001). A significant decrease was observed in rib fractures (57 % vs. 85 %; p = 0.02), but not sternum fractures (5 % vs. 17 %; p = 0.15). Use of the Cardio First Angel™ CPR feedback device improved adherence to published CPR guidelines and CPR quality, and it was associated with increased rates of ROSC. A decrease in rib but not sternum fractures was observed with device use. Further independent prospective validation is warranted to determine if these results are reproducible in other acute care settings. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02394977 . Registered on 5 Mar 2015. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 4 | 18% |
| United States | 2 | 9% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 5% |
| Colombia | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Turkey | 1 | 5% |
| Panama | 1 | 5% |
| Mexico | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 32% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 14% |
| Scientists | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 135 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 14% |
| Researcher | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 28 | 21% |
| Unknown | 52 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 13% |
| Engineering | 4 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 1% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 4% |
| Unknown | 58 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 14 June 2016.
All research outputs
#2,730,202
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,361
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,630
of 342,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#77
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 342,343 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.