↓ Skip to main content

Compared effects of inhibition and exogenous administration of Hydrogen Sulfide in ischaemia-reperfusion injury.

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Compared effects of inhibition and exogenous administration of Hydrogen Sulfide in ischaemia-reperfusion injury.
Published in
Critical Care, July 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc12808
Pubmed ID
Abstract

Haemorrhagic shock is associated with an inflammatory response consecutive to ischaemia-reperfusion (I/R) that leads to cardiovascular failure and organ injury. The role of and the timing of administration of hydrogen sulphide (H2S) remain uncertain. Vascular effects of H2S are mainly mediated through K+ATP-channel activation. Herein, we compared the effects of D,L-propargylglycine (PAG), an inhibitor of H2S production, as well as sodium hydrosulphide (NaHS), an H2S donor, on haemodynamics, vascular reactivity and cellular pathways in a rat model of I/R. We also compared the haemodynamic effects of NaHS administered before and 10 minutes after reperfusion.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 3%
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Other 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 10 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 47%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 11 37%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 2013.
All research outputs
#3,070,782
of 4,507,280 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,053
of 2,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,751
of 89,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#66
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,510 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 89,019 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.