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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Perfusion indices revisited
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Intensive Care, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40560-017-0220-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ahmed Hasanin, Ahmed Mukhtar, Heba Nassar |
| Abstract |
Monitoring of tissue perfusion is an essential step in the management of acute circulatory failure. The presence of cellular dysfunction has been a basic component of shock definition even in the absence of hypotension. Monitoring of tissue perfusion includes biomarkers of global tissue perfusion and measures for assessment of perfusion in non-vital organs. The presence of poor tissue perfusion in a shocked patient is usually associated with worse outcome. Persistently impaired perfusion despite adequate resuscitation is also associated with worse outcome. Thus, normalization of some perfusion indices has become one of the resuscitation targets in patients with septic shock. Although the collective evidence shows the clear relation between impaired peripheral perfusion and mortality, the use of different perfusion indices as a resuscitation target needs more research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Egypt | 2 | 29% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Colombia | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 211 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 211 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 22 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 20 | 9% |
| Researcher | 19 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 44 | 21% |
| Unknown | 74 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 94 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 6% |
| Engineering | 7 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 16 | 8% |
| Unknown | 75 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 06 May 2023.
All research outputs
#5,255,836
of 24,736,359 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
#240
of 557 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,114
of 312,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,736,359 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 557 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 312,878 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.