↓ Skip to main content

Antiplatelet therapy: a double-edged sword in head injury?

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Antiplatelet therapy: a double-edged sword in head injury?
Published in
Critical Care, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc12597
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher Beynon, Oliver W Sakowitz

Abstract

Antiplatelet therapy for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases is common in the ageing population. Whether this therapy exacerbates brain injury after head trauma is an important, but unsettled, topic. In this issue of Critical Care, Fabbri and colleagues address the question of whether pre-injury intake of antiplatelet medication increases the risk profile of patients with posttraumatic intracranial lesions after head trauma. Antiplatelet medication, and in particular clopidogrel, increased the risk for haematoma progression, need for neurosurgical intervention and an unfavourable outcome. Clinicians should consider this increased risk profile in the treatment of respective patients. Since its introduction as an analgesic in 1897, aspirin has surprised the medical community more than once due to its versatile properties. Prevention of secondary brain damage through aspirin has been reported for ischaemic stroke and subarachnoid haemorrhage. In cases of acute traumatic haemorrhage after head injury, antiplatelet therapy's neuroprotective effects may be outweighed by the increased bleeding tendency.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 16%
Student > Master 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Researcher 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 55%
Neuroscience 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 11 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 July 2020.
All research outputs
#7,778,510
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,172
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,607
of 207,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#67
of 163 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th 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 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 207,222 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 163 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 58% of its contemporaries.