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 |
Prevalence, predictors and outcome of hypofibrinogenaemia in trauma: a multicentre observational study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc13798 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jostein S Hagemo, Simon Stanworth, Nicole P Juffermans, Karim Brohi, Mitchell Jay Cohen, Pär I Johansson, Jo Røislien, Torsten Eken, Paal A Næss, Christine Gaarder |
| Abstract |
Exsanguination due to trauma-induced coagulopathy is a continuing challenge in emergency trauma care. Fibrinogen is a crucial factor for haemostatic competence, and may be the factor that reaches critically low levels first. Early fibrinogen substitution is advocated by a number of authors. Little evidence exists regarding the indications for fibrinogen supplementation in the acute phase. This study aims to estimate the prevalence of hypofibrinogenaemia in a multi-center trauma population, and to explore how initial fibrinogen concentration relates to outcome. Also, factors contributing to low fibrinogen levels are identified. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 2 | 33% |
| Norway | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 102 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 18% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Researcher | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 11% |
| Other | 20 | 19% |
| Unknown | 15 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 70 | 67% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 16 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 07 January 2016.
All research outputs
#5,140,987
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,343
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,563
of 238,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#40
of 157 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 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 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 238,081 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 157 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 73% of its contemporaries.