↓ Skip to main content

Biomarkers and acute brain injuries: interest and limits

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, January 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 (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 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
Biomarkers and acute brain injuries: interest and limits
Published in
Critical Care, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/cc13841
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ségolène Mrozek, Julien Dumurgier, Giuseppe Citerio, Alexandre Mebazaa, Thomas Geeraerts

Abstract

For patients presenting with acute brain injury (such as traumatic brain injury, subarachnoid haemorrhage and stroke), the diagnosis and identification of intracerebral lesions and evaluation of the severity, prognosis and treatment efficacy can be challenging. The complexity and heterogeneity of lesions after brain injury are most probably responsible for this difficulty. Patients with apparently comparable brain lesions on imaging may have different neurological outcomes or responses to therapy. In recent years, plasmatic and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers have emerged as possible tools to distinguish between the different pathophysiological processes. This review aims to summarise the plasmatic and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers evaluated in subarachnoid haemorrhage, traumatic brain injury and stroke, and to clarify their related interests and limits for diagnosis and prognosis. For subarachnoid haemorrhage, particular interest has been focused on the biomarkers used to predict vasospasm and cerebral ischaemia. The efficacy of biomarkers in predicting the severity and outcome of traumatic brain injury has been stressed. The very early diagnostic performance of biomarkers and their ability to discriminate ischaemic from haemorrhagic stroke were studied.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Romania 1 <1%
Unknown 111 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 15%
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Postgraduate 15 13%
Other 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Other 30 26%
Unknown 12 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 49%
Neuroscience 16 14%
Chemistry 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 19 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 25 April 2018.
All research outputs
#3,537,738
of 22,754,104 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,571
of 6,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,438
of 305,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#63
of 219 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,754,104 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 305,246 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 219 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 71% of its contemporaries.