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 |
Spinal cord injury: is monitoring from the injury site the future?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-016-1490-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Samira Saadoun, Marios C. Papadopoulos |
| Abstract |
This paper challenges the current management of acute traumatic spinal cord injury based on our experience with monitoring from the injury site in the neurointensive care unit. We argue that the concept of bony decompression is inadequate. The concept of optimum spinal cord perfusion pressure, which differs between patients, is introduced. Such variability suggests individualized patient treatment. Failing to optimize spinal cord perfusion limits the entry of systemically administered drugs into the injured cord. We conclude that monitoring from the injury site helps optimize management and should be subjected to a trial to determine whether it improves outcome. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Czechia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 70 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 22% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 16 | 22% |
| Unknown | 12 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 35% |
| Neuroscience | 16 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 22 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 November 2017.
All research outputs
#8,185,440
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,291
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,151
of 327,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#88
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
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 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 327,006 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 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.