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 |
Endogenous H2S in hemorrhagic shock: innocent bystander or central player?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc11833 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Enrico Calzia, Peter Radermacher, Kenneth R Olson |
| Abstract |
ABSTRACT: The role of the gaseous mediator hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in hemorrhagic shock is still a matter of debate. This debate is emphasized by the fact that available literature data on blood and tissue H2S concentrations vary by three orders of magnitude, both under physiological conditions as well as during stress states. Therefore, in a rat model of unresuscitated, lethal hemorrhagic shock, Van de Louw and Haouzi tested the two hypotheses of whether blood and tissue H2S levels would increase due to the shock-related tissue hypoxia, and whether vitamin B12 would attenuate organ injury and improve survival as a result of enhanced H2S oxidation. Hemorrhage did not affect the blood and tissue H2S content, and, despite the increased capacity to oxidize H2S, vitamin B12 did not affect any parameter of shock severity. The authors concluded that H2S concentrations cannot be used as a marker of shock, most probably as a result of tissue's capacity to oxidize H2S even under conditions of severe oxygen debt. This research paper elegantly re-adjusts the currently available data on blood and tissue H2S levels, and thereby adds an important piece to the puzzle of whether H2S release should be enhanced or lowered during stress conditions associated with tissue hypoxia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 36% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 18% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 2 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 36% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 November 2012.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#5,469
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,588
of 285,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#80
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 285,955 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.