↓ Skip to main content

Propofol versus thiopental sodium for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus.

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Propofol versus thiopental sodium for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus.
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009202.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Prabhakar H, Bindra A, Singh GP, Kalaivani M, Prabhakar, Hemanshu, Bindra, Ashish, Singh, Gyaninder Pal, Kalaivani, Mani

Abstract

Failure to respond to antiepileptic drugs in uncontrolled seizure activity such as refractory status epilepticus (RSE) has led to the use of anaesthetic drugs. Coma is induced with anaesthetic drugs to achieve complete control of seizure activity. Thiopental sodium and propofol are popularly used for this purpose. Both agents have been found to be effective. However, there is substantial lack of evidence as to which of the two drugs is better in terms of clinical outcome.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 33%
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Student > Postgraduate 2 17%
Other 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 67%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Unknown 1 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 05 November 2012.
All research outputs
#3,615,413
of 13,190,464 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,567
of 10,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,870
of 126,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#63
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,190,464 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,519 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.6. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 126,022 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.