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 |
Role of nutrition support in adult cardiac surgery: a consensus statement from an International Multidisciplinary Expert Group on Nutrition in Cardiac Surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-017-1690-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christian Stoppe, Andreas Goetzenich, Glenn Whitman, Rika Ohkuma, Trish Brown, Roupen Hatzakorzian, Arnold Kristof, Patrick Meybohm, Jefferey Mechanick, Adam Evans, Daniel Yeh, Bernard McDonald, Michael Chourdakis, Philip Jones, Richard Barton, Ravi Tripathi, Gunnar Elke, Oliver Liakopoulos, Ravi Agarwala, Vladimir Lomivorotov, Ekaterina Nesterova, Gernot Marx, Carina Benstoem, Margot Lemieux, Daren K. Heyland |
| Abstract |
Nutrition support is a necessary therapy for critically ill cardiac surgery patients. However, conclusive evidence for this population, consisting of well-conducted clinical trials is lacking. To clarify optimal strategies to improve outcomes, an international multidisciplinary group of 25 experts from different clinical specialties from Germany, Canada, Greece, USA and Russia discussed potential approaches to identify patients who may benefit from nutrition support, when best to initiate nutrition support, and the potential use of pharmaco-nutrition to modulate the inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass. Despite conspicuous knowledge and evidence gaps, a rational nutritional support therapy is presented to benefit patients undergoing cardiac surgery. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 165 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 24 | 15% |
| Researcher | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 8% |
| Other | 33 | 20% |
| Unknown | 50 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 60 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 5% |
| Unknown | 59 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 April 2019.
All research outputs
#15,173,117
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,987
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,237
of 331,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#75
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 331,621 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.