↓ Skip to main content

Anemia management after acute brain injury

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
38 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
86 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
181 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
Anemia management after acute brain injury
Published in
Critical Care, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13054-016-1321-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christophe Lelubre, Pierre Bouzat, Ilaria Alice Crippa, Fabio Silvio Taccone

Abstract

Anemia is frequent among brain-injured patients, where it has been associated with an increased risk of poor outcome. The pathophysiology of anemia in this patient population remains multifactorial; moreover, whether anemia merely reflects a higher severity of the underlying disease or is a significant determinant of the neurological recovery of such patients remains unclear. Interestingly, the effects of red blood cell transfusions (RBCT) in moderately anemic patients remain controversial; although hemoglobin levels are increased, different studies observed only a modest and inconsistent improvement in cerebral oxygenation after RBCT and raised serious concerns about the risk of increased complications. Thus, considering this "blood transfusion anemia paradox", the optimal hemoglobin level to trigger RBCT in brain-injured patients has not been defined yet; also, there is insufficient evidence to provide strong recommendations regarding which hemoglobin level to target and which associated transfusion strategy (restrictive versus liberal) to select in this patient population. We summarize in this review article the more relevant studies evaluating the effects of anemia and RBCT in patients with an acute neurological condition; also, we propose some potential strategies to optimize transfusion management in such patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 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 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 178 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 24 13%
Researcher 23 13%
Student > Postgraduate 20 11%
Student > Master 17 9%
Student > Bachelor 16 9%
Other 38 21%
Unknown 43 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 106 59%
Neuroscience 8 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 2%
Unspecified 3 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Other 9 5%
Unknown 48 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 20 June 2019.
All research outputs
#1,277,960
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,085
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,929
of 368,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#37
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 368,616 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.