↓ Skip to main content

Management of bleeding and coagulopathy following major trauma: an updated European guideline

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
4 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
184 tweeters
patent
1 patent
facebook
10 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
3 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
714 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1063 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
Management of bleeding and coagulopathy following major trauma: an updated European guideline
Published in
Critical Care, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc12685
Pubmed ID
Authors

Donat R Spahn, Bertil Bouillon, Vladimir Cerny, Timothy J Coats, Jacques Duranteau, Enrique Fernández-Mondéjar, Daniela Filipescu, Beverley J Hunt, Radko Komadina, Giuseppe Nardi, Edmund Neugebauer, Yves Ozier, Louis Riddez, Arthur Schultz, Jean-Louis Vincent, Rolf Rossaint

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Evidence-based recommendations are needed to guide the acute management of the bleeding trauma patient. When these recommendations are implemented patient outcomes may be improved. METHODS: The multidisciplinary Task Force for Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma was formed in 2005 with the aim of developing a guideline for the management of bleeding following severe injury. This document represents an updated version of the guideline published by the group in 2007 and updated in 2010. Recommendations were formulated using a nominal group process, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) hierarchy of evidence and based on a systematic review of published literature. RESULTS: Key changes encompassed in this version of the guideline include new recommendations on the appropriate use of vasopressors and inotropic agents, and reflect an awareness of the growing number of patients in the population at large treated with antiplatelet agents and/or oral anticoagulants. The current guideline also includes recommendations and a discussion of thromboprophylactic strategies for all patients following traumatic injury. The most significant addition is a new section that discusses the need for every institution to develop, implement and adhere to an evidence-based clinical protocol to manage traumatically injured patients. The remaining recommendations have been re-evaluated and graded based on literature published since the last edition of the guideline. Consideration was also given to changes in clinical practice that have taken place during this time period as a result of both new evidence and changes in the general availability of relevant agents and technologies. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to trauma care and mechanisms with which to ensure that established protocols are consistently implemented will ensure a uniform and high standard of care across Europe and beyond.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 184 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 1,063 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 8 <1%
Italy 5 <1%
Germany 5 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
United States 3 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Austria 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Other 19 2%
Unknown 1011 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 188 18%
Researcher 149 14%
Student > Postgraduate 132 12%
Student > Master 127 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 85 8%
Other 293 28%
Unknown 89 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 787 74%
Nursing and Health Professions 43 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 12 1%
Engineering 10 <1%
Other 65 6%
Unknown 130 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 155. 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 17 September 2019.
All research outputs
#162,460
of 18,880,385 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#67
of 5,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,183
of 168,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#1
of 138 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,880,385 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,527 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 168,707 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 138 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.