↓ Skip to main content

A randomised, controlled crossover comparison of the C-MAC videolaryngoscope with direct laryngoscopy in 150 patients during routine induction of anaesthesia

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Anesthesiology, March 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
A randomised, controlled crossover comparison of the C-MAC videolaryngoscope with direct laryngoscopy in 150 patients during routine induction of anaesthesia
Published in
BMC Anesthesiology, March 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2253-11-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erol Cavus, Carsten Thee, Thora Moeller, Joerg Kieckhaefer, Volker Doerges, Klaus Wagner

Abstract

The C-MAC® (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany) has recently been introduced as a new device for videolaryngoscopy guided intubation. The purpose of the present study was to compare for the first time the C-MAC with conventional direct laryngoscopy in 150 patients during routine induction of anaesthesia.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 2 3%
Denmark 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 56 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 20%
Student > Postgraduate 10 16%
Other 8 13%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 64%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Psychology 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 12 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 July 2012.
All research outputs
#3,570,197
of 22,710,079 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#113
of 1,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,709
of 109,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,710,079 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,479 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 109,009 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them