↓ Skip to main content

Clinically integrated multi-organ point-of-care ultrasound for undifferentiated respiratory difficulty, chest pain, or shock: a critical analytic review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Intensive Care, August 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 (89th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
30 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 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
Clinically integrated multi-organ point-of-care ultrasound for undifferentiated respiratory difficulty, chest pain, or shock: a critical analytic review
Published in
Journal of Intensive Care, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40560-016-0172-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Young-Rock Ha, Hong-Chuen Toh

Abstract

Rapid and accurate diagnosis and treatment are paramount in the management of the critically ill. Critical care ultrasound has been widely used as an adjunct to standard clinical examination, an invaluable extension of physical examination to guide clinical decision-making at bedside. Recently, there is growing interest in the use of multi-organ point-of-care ultrasound (MOPOCUS) for the management of the critically ill, especially in the early phase of resuscitation. This article will review the role and utility of symptom-based and sign-oriented MOPOCUS in patients with undifferentiated respiratory difficulty, chest pain, or shock and how it can be performed in a timely, effective, and efficient manner.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 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 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 93 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 18%
Student > Master 12 13%
Other 11 12%
Student > Postgraduate 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 22 23%
Unknown 17 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 71%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Social Sciences 1 1%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 1%
Unknown 20 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 December 2022.
All research outputs
#2,082,089
of 25,058,660 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
#102
of 564 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,346
of 352,219 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
#9
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,058,660 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 564 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 352,219 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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 50% of its contemporaries.