↓ Skip to main content

Limb Remote Ischemic Conditioning: Mechanisms, Anesthetics, and the Potential for Expanding Therapeutic Options

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, February 2018
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 (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Limb Remote Ischemic Conditioning: Mechanisms, Anesthetics, and the Potential for Expanding Therapeutic Options
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2018.00040
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gangling Chen, Mrugesh Thakkar, Christopher Robinson, Sylvain Doré

Abstract

Novel and innovative approaches are essential in developing new treatments and improving clinical outcomes in patients with ischemic stroke. Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a series of mechanical interruptions in blood flow of a distal organ, following end organ reperfusion, shown to significantly reduce infarct size through inhibition of oxidation and inflammation. Ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) is what ultimately leads to the irreversible brain damage and clinical picture seen in stroke patients. There have been several reports and reviews about the potential of RIC in acute ischemic stroke; however, the focus here is a comprehensive look at the differences in the three types of RIC (remote pre-, per-, and postconditioning). There are some limited uses of preconditioning in acute ischemic stroke due to the unpredictability of the ischemic event; however, it does provide the identification of biomarkers for clinical studies. Remote limb per- and postconditioning offer a more promising treatment during patient care as they can be harnessed during or after the initial ischemic insult. Though further research is needed, it is imperative to discuss the importance of preclinical data in understanding the methods and mechanisms involved in RIC. This understanding will facilitate translation to a clinically feasible paradigm for use in the hospital setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Master 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 24 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 25%
Neuroscience 10 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 31 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 18 December 2020.
All research outputs
#3,025,206
of 25,809,966 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#1,656
of 14,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,484
of 449,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#17
of 221 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,809,966 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 449,915 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 221 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 92% of its contemporaries.