↓ Skip to main content

Accuracy and precision of calibrated arterial pulse contour analysis in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage requiring high-dose vasopressor therapy: a prospective observational clinical trial

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Accuracy and precision of calibrated arterial pulse contour analysis in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage requiring high-dose vasopressor therapy: a prospective observational clinical trial
Published in
Critical Care, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/cc13715
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastian M Metzelder, Mark Coburn, Christian Stoppe, Michael Fries, Tim-Philipp Simon, Marcus HT Reinges, Anke Höllig, Rolf Rossaint, Gernot Marx, Steffen Rex

Abstract

Calibrated arterial pulse contour analysis has become an established method for the continuous monitoring of cardiac output (PCCO). However, data on its validity in hemodynamically instable patients beyond the setting of cardiac surgery are scarce. We performed the present study to assess the validity and precision of PCCO-measurements using the PiCCOTM-device compared to transpulmonary thermodilution derived cardiac output (TPCO) as the reference technique in neurosurgical patients requiring high-dose vasopressor-therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
Unknown 47 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 20%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 5 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Psychology 3 6%
Engineering 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 10 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 June 2019.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#5,469
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,191
of 322,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#97
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 322,640 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.