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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Individual patient data systematic review and meta-analysis of optic nerve sheath diameter ultrasonography for detecting raised intracranial pressure: protocol of the ONSD research group
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-2-62 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julie Dubourg, Mahmoud Messerer, Dimitrios Karakitsos, Venkatakrishna Rajajee, Erik Antonsen, Etienne Javouhey, Alessandro Cammarata, Michael Cotton, Roy Thomas Daniel, Carmelo Denaro, Emmanuel Douzinas, Clément Dubost, Moncef Berhouma, Behrouz Kassai, Muriel Rabilloud, Antonino Gullo, Abderrhammane Hamlat, Gregorios Kouraklis, Giuseppe Mannanici, Keith Marill, Sybille Merceron, John Poularas, Giuseppe Ristagno, Vicki Noble, Sachita Shah, Heidi Kimberly, Gianluca Cammarata, Riccardo Moretti, Thomas Geeraerts |
| Abstract |
The purpose of the optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) research group project is to establish an individual patient-level database from high quality studies of ONSD ultrasonography for the detection of raised intracranial pressure (ICP), and to perform a systematic review and an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA), which will provide a cutoff value to help physicians making decisions and encourage further research. Previous meta-analyses were able to assess the diagnostic accuracy of ONSD ultrasonography in detecting raised ICP but failed to determine a precise cutoff value. Thus, the ONSD research group was founded to synthesize data from several recent studies on the subject and to provide evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of ONSD ultrasonography in detecting raised ICP. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Rwanda | 1 | <1% |
| Benin | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 91 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 13% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 9% |
| Professor | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 23 | 23% |
| Unknown | 26 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 50% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Linguistics | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 35 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 01 March 2014.
All research outputs
#5,868,046
of 22,741,406 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,128
of 1,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,322
of 197,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#13
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,741,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,988 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 197,269 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.