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 |
Missing link or not, mobilise against delirium
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc13712 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Valerie J Page, Annalisa Casarin |
| Abstract |
Delirium is known to be a predictor of adverse outcomes. In a prospective study Abelha and colleagues showed that postoperative delirium was an independent risk factor for deterioration in functional capacity following discharge. While evidence for causality remains elusive, there is no doubt that patients who develop delirium are left with new functional and cognitive impairment. Finding a pharmacological treatment for the prevention and treatment of delirium is a priority in delirium research and the results of ongoing trials are awaited. Early mobilisation of ICU patients has been demonstrated to decrease delirium and improve functional outcomes. Resources should be directed to appropriate, progressive mobilisation of all critically ill patients as a priority. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 41 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 16% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 18% |
| Unknown | 16 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 14% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
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 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,982,037
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#5,195
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,949
of 322,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#77
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 322,344 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.