↓ Skip to main content

Update in acute respiratory distress syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Intensive Care, January 2014
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 (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
187 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
Update in acute respiratory distress syndrome
Published in
Journal of Intensive Care, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/2052-0492-2-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Younsuck Koh

Abstract

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterized by permeability pulmonary edema and refractory hypoxemia. Recently, the new definition of ARDS has been published, and this definition suggested severity-oriented respiratory treatment by introducing three levels of severity according to PaO2/FiO2 and positive end-expiratory pressure. Lung-protective ventilation is still the key of better outcome in ARDS. Through randomized trials, short-term use of neuromuscular blockade at initial stage of mechanical ventilation, prone ventilation in severe ARDS, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in ARDS with influenza pneumonia showed beneficial efficacy. However, ARDS mortality still remains high. Therefore, early recognition of ARDS modified risk factors and the avoidance of aggravating factors during the patient's hospital stay can help decrease its development. In addition, efficient antifibrotic strategies in late-stage ARDS should be developed to improve the outcome.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 tweeters 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 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 2 1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Philippines 1 <1%
Unknown 178 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 34 18%
Other 24 13%
Researcher 22 12%
Student > Bachelor 19 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 10%
Other 51 27%
Unknown 18 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 113 60%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 2%
Other 13 7%
Unknown 20 11%

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 19 July 2015.
All research outputs
#2,975,405
of 19,474,859 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
#135
of 450 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,655
of 270,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,474,859 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 450 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 270,919 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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