↓ Skip to main content

Bench-to-bedside review: Chloride in critical illness

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, July 2010
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
258 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
244 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Bench-to-bedside review: Chloride in critical illness
Published in
Critical Care, July 2010
DOI 10.1186/cc9052
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nor'azim Mohd Yunos, Rinaldo Bellomo, David Story, John Kellum

Abstract

Chloride is the principal anion in the extracellular fluid and is the second main contributor to plasma tonicity. Its concentration is frequently abnormal in intensive care unit patients, often as a consequence of fluid therapy. Yet chloride has received less attention than any other ion in the critical care literature. New insights into its physiological roles have emerged together with progress in understanding the structures and functions of chloride channels. In clinical practice, interest in a physicochemical approach to acid-base physiology has directed renewed attention to chloride as a major determinant of acid-base status. It has also indirectly helped to generate interest in other possible effects of disorders of chloraemia. The present review summarizes key aspects of chloride physiology, including its channels, as well as the clinical relevance of disorders of chloraemia. The paper also highlights current knowledge on the impact of different types of intravenous fluids on chloride concentration and the potential effects of such changes on organ physiology. Finally, the review examines the potential intensive care unit practice implications of a better understanding of chloride.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 1%
Italy 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 232 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 41 17%
Student > Postgraduate 32 13%
Student > Master 29 12%
Researcher 26 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 9%
Other 52 21%
Unknown 43 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 156 64%
Chemistry 7 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 2%
Other 17 7%
Unknown 48 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 04 April 2018.
All research outputs
#2,827,992
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,423
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,543
of 104,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#2
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 104,613 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 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 94% of its contemporaries.