↓ Skip to main content

Year in review 2011: Critical Care - Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and trauma

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (59th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Year in review 2011: Critical Care - Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and trauma
Published in
Critical Care, December 2012
DOI 10.1186/cc11832
Pubmed ID
Abstract

ABSTRACT: In 2011, numerous studies were published in Critical Care focusing on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, trauma, and some related airway, respiratory, and response time factors. In this review, we summarize several of these studies, including those that brought forth advances in therapies for the post-resuscitative period. These advances involved hypothesis-generating concepts in therapeutic hypothermia as well as the impact of early percutaneous coronary artery interventions and the potential utility of extracorporeal life support after cardiac arrest. There were also articles pertaining to the importance of timing in prehospital airway management, the outcome impact of hyperoxia, and the timing of end-tidal carbon dioxide measurements to predict futility in cardiac arrest resuscitation. In other articles, additional perspectives were provided on the classic correlations between emergency medical service response intervals and outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Czechia 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 16%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Other 11 26%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 56%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 12%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 9 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 December 2012.
All research outputs
#7,058,193
of 13,464,110 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,942
of 4,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,242
of 248,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#93
of 167 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,464,110 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,294 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 248,403 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 167 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.