↓ Skip to main content

Diagnosis and treatment of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) according to four DIC guidelines

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Intensive Care, February 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 (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 tweeters
patent
1 patent
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
150 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
265 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
Diagnosis and treatment of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) according to four DIC guidelines
Published in
Journal of Intensive Care, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/2052-0492-2-15
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hideo Wada, Takeshi Matsumoto, Yoshiki Yamashita

Abstract

Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is categorized into bleeding, organ failure, massive bleeding, and non-symptomatic types according to the sum of vectors for hypercoagulation and hyperfibrinolysis. The British Committee for Standards in Haematology, Japanese Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis, and the Italian Society for Thrombosis and Haemostasis published separate guidelines for DIC; however, there are several differences between these three sets of guidelines. Therefore, the International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) recently harmonized these differences and published the guidance of diagnosis and treatment for DIC. There are three different diagnostic criteria according to the Japanese Ministry Health, Labour and Welfare, ISTH, and Japanese Association of Acute Medicine. The first and second criteria can be used to diagnose the bleeding or massive bleeding types of DIC, while the third criteria cover organ failure and the massive bleeding type of DIC. Treatment of underlying conditions is recommended in three types of DIC, with the exception of massive bleeding. Blood transfusions are recommended in patients with the bleeding and massive bleeding types of DIC. Meanwhile, treatment with heparin is recommended in those with the non-symptomatic type of DIC. The administration of synthetic protease inhibitors and antifibrinolytic therapy is recommended in patients with the bleeding and massive bleeding types of DIC. Furthermore, the administration of natural protease inhibitors is recommended in patients with the organ failure type of DIC, while antifibrinolytic treatment is not. The diagnosis and treatment of DIC should be carried out in accordance with the type of DIC.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 265 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 2 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 261 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 41 15%
Student > Postgraduate 40 15%
Student > Master 33 12%
Other 29 11%
Researcher 26 10%
Other 51 19%
Unknown 45 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 152 57%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 8 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 3%
Other 23 9%
Unknown 53 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 13 January 2021.
All research outputs
#1,902,195
of 17,429,432 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
#102
of 417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,119
of 194,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,429,432 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 417 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 194,395 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 88% 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