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 |
Intensive care unit depth of sleep: proof of concept of a simple electroencephalography index in the non-sedated
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc13823 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laurens Reinke, Johannes H van der Hoeven, Michel JAM van Putten, Willem Dieperink, Jaap E Tulleken |
| Abstract |
Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are known to experience severely disturbed sleep, with possible detrimental effects on short- and long- term outcomes. Investigation into the exact causes and effects of disturbed sleep has been hampered by cumbersome and time consuming methods of measuring and staging sleep. We introduce a novel method for ICU depth of sleep analysis, the ICU depth of sleep index (IDOS index), using single channel electroencephalography (EEG) and apply it to outpatient recordings. A proof of concept is shown in non-sedated ICU patients. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Czechia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 55 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 16% |
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 13 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 44% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 09 April 2014.
All research outputs
#14,387,227
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,748
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,432
of 241,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#93
of 163 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 241,343 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 163 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.