↓ Skip to main content

Revisiting therapeutic hypothermia for severe traumatic brain injury… again

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Revisiting therapeutic hypothermia for severe traumatic brain injury… again
Published in
Critical Care, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/cc13955
Pubmed ID
Authors

Donald W Marion, Lemma E Regasa

Abstract

Improved understanding of the molecular mechanisms of secondary brain injury has informed the optimum depth and duration of cooling and led to increased clinical interest in the therapeutic moderate hypothermia for severe traumatic brain injury over the past two decades. Although several large multi-center clinical trials have not found a treatment effect, multiple single-center trials have, and a recent meta-analysis by Crossley and colleagues now finds that the cumulative findings of those single-center trials dilute the multi-center trial results and show an overall reduction in mortality and poor outcomes associated with cooling. The need for consistent support of key physiologic parameters during cooling is emphasized by this finding.

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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Romania 1 2%
Unknown 39 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 24%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 9 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 12 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 December 2014.
All research outputs
#14,913,921
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,912
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,011
of 241,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#85
of 138 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 241,932 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 138 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.