↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

Epinephrine for prehospital cardiac arrest with non-shockable rhythm

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley

What is this page?

Summary Twitter Dimensions citations
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
Epinephrine for prehospital cardiac arrest with non-shockable rhythm
Published in
Critical Care, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc13044
Pubmed ID
24089709
Authors

Stratton, Samuel J

Abstract

Cardiopulmonary arrest research and guidelines have generally focused on the treatment and management of ventricular fibrillation and pulseless ventricular fibrillation (electrical shockable rhythms). Less investigation has been done on the subpopulation of cardiopulmonary arrest victims that present with non-shockable rhythms. In a new paper, Goto, Maeda, and Goto present evidence that early use of epinephrine for treatment is associated with better survival with functional outcome. While there is a lack of evidence to support epinephrine for management of cardiopulmonary arrest presenting with initial shockable rhythms (presumed primary cardiac origin), there is now evidence that epinephrine may potentially benefit those presenting with non-shockable cardiopulmonary arrest (presumed heterogeneous origins). Further research on non-shockable rhythm cardiopulmonary arrest is needed to understand the subpopulation and develop better treatment guidelines.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Other 3 23%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 69%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 15%
Unspecified 1 8%
Arts and Humanities 1 8%

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 12 February 2014.
All research outputs
#2,085,015
of 4,505,915 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,498
of 2,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,752
of 127,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#66
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,505,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 53rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,510 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 127,080 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.

This page is provided by Altmetric.