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 |
Preserved frontal lobe oxygenation following calcium chloride for treatment of anesthesia-induced hypotension
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2014.00407 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carl-Christian Kitchen, Peter Nissen, Niels H. Secher, Henning B. Nielsen |
| Abstract |
Vasopressor agents may affect cerebral oxygenation (rScO2) as determined by near-infrared spectroscopy on the forehead. This case series evaluated the effect of calcium chloride vs. α and β-adrenergic receptor agonists on rScO2 in patients (n = 47) undergoing surgery during i.v. anesthesia. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and cardiac output (CO) were assessed by Model-flow(®) and ephedrine (55 ± 3 vs. 74 ± 9 mmHg; 10 mg, n = 9), phenylephrine (51 ± 5 vs. 78 ± 9 mmHg, 0.1 mg, n = 11), adrenaline (53 ± 3 vs. 72 ± 11 mmHg; 1-2 μg, n = 6), noradrenaline (53 ± 5 vs. 72 ± 12 mmHg; 2-4 μg, n = 11), and calcium chloride (49 ± 7 vs. 57 ± 16 mmHg; 5 mmol, n = 10) increased MAP (all P < 0.05). CO increased with ephedrine (4.3 ± 0.9 vs. 5.3 ± 1.2, P < 0.05) and adrenaline (4.7 ± 1.2 vs. 5.9 ± 1.1 l/min; P = 0.07) but was not significantly affected by phenylephrine (3.9 ± 0.7 vs. 3.6 ± 1.0 l/min), noradrenaline (3.8 ± 1.2 vs. 3.7 ± 0.7 l/min), or calcium chloride (4.0 ± 1.4 vs. 4.1 ± 1.5 l/min). Following administration of β-adrenergic agents and calcium chloride rScO2 was preserved while after administration of α-adrenergic drugs rScO2 was reduced by app. 2% (P < 0.05). Following α-adrenergic drugs to treat anesthesia-induced hypotension tissue oxygenation is reduced while the use of β-adrenergic agonists and calcium chloride preserve tissue oxygenation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 6 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 42% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 22 October 2014.
All research outputs
#14,786,597
of 22,765,347 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#5,653
of 13,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,848
of 260,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#38
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,765,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,560 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 260,347 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 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 64% of its contemporaries.