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 |
Prehospital fibrinolysis versus primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-016-1530-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vincent Roule, Pierre Ardouin, Katrien Blanchart, Adrien Lemaitre, Julien Wain-Hobson, Damien Legallois, Joachim Alexandre, Rémi Sabatier, Paul Milliez, Farzin Beygui |
| Abstract |
Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the preferred reperfusion strategy in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), but its benefit over prehospital fibrinolysis (FL) is not clear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in which outcomes of patients with STEMI managed with FL early in the prehospital setting versus PPCI were compared. Compared with PPCI, FL was consistently associated with similar rates of short-term (30-90 days) death (relative risk [RR] 0.94, 95 % CI 0.67-1.31) and cardiovascular death (RR 0.95, 95 % CI 0.64-1.4), a decreased risk of cardiogenic shock (RR 0.67, 95 % CI 0.48-0.95), and an increased risk of any stroke (RR 3.57, 95 % CI 1.39-9.17) and hemorrhagic stroke (RR 4.37, 95 % CI 1.25-15.26). FL was also associated with similar rates of 1-year mortality (RR 1.01, 95 % CI 0.75-1.34) and major bleeding (RR 1.31, 95 % CI 0.96-1.78) in comparison with PPCI, but with a notable level (I (2) index 30.5 % and 59.8 %) of heterogeneity among studies. Our study suggests that, compared with PPCI, FL performed in the early prehospital setting is associated with similar mortality rates, lower rates of cardiogenic shock, and higher rates of stroke in patients with STEMI. Although the number of studies comparing the two strategies is relatively low, our results support prehospital FL and transfer to hub percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centers as a valid alternative to PPCI, allowing potential limitation of resources allocated to developing proximity 24/7 PCI facilities. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 Kingdom | 4 | 31% |
| Italy | 1 | 8% |
| Spain | 1 | 8% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 8% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 8% |
| South Africa | 1 | 8% |
| Canada | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 23% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 62% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 31% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 120 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 21% |
| Researcher | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 20% |
| Unknown | 41 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 31 | 25% |
| Unspecified | 1 | <1% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | <1% |
| Mathematics | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Unknown | 44 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 20 December 2021.
All research outputs
#2,102,000
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,859
of 6,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,726
of 318,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#35
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 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 6,613 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 318,442 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 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 68% of its contemporaries.