↓ Skip to main content

Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Perihemorrhagic Edema and Secondary Hematoma Expansion: From Bench Work to Ongoing Controversies

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, November 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 (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 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
Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Perihemorrhagic Edema and Secondary Hematoma Expansion: From Bench Work to Ongoing Controversies
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2016.00210
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manoj K. Mittal, Aaron LacKamp

Abstract

Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a medical emergency, which often leads to severe disability and death. ICH-related poor outcomes are due to primary injury causing structural damage and mass effect and secondary injury in the perihemorrhagic region over several days to weeks. Secondary injury after ICH can be due to hematoma expansion (HE) or a consequence of repair pathway along the continuum of neuroinflammation, neuronal death, and perihemorrhagic edema (PHE). This review article is focused on PHE and HE and will cover the animal studies, related human studies, and clinical trials relating to these mechanisms of secondary brain injury in ICH patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Researcher 10 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 15 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 40%
Neuroscience 12 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 18 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 26 July 2018.
All research outputs
#4,551,927
of 24,601,689 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#3,693
of 13,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,828
of 424,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#13
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,601,689 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,674 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 424,792 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.