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 |
Evaluating physical functioning in critical care: considerations for clinical practice and research
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-017-1827-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Selina M. Parry, Minxuan Huang, Dale M. Needham |
| Abstract |
The evaluation of physical functioning is valuable in the intensive care unit (ICU) to help inform patient recovery after critical illness, to identify patients who may require rehabilitation interventions, and to monitor responsiveness to such interventions. This viewpoint article discusses: (1) the concept of physical functioning with reference to the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health; (2) the importance of measuring physical functioning in the ICU; and (3) methods for evaluating physical functioning in the ICU. Recommendations for clinical practice and research are made, along with discussion of future directions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 193 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 | 36 | 19% |
| United States | 33 | 17% |
| Brazil | 8 | 4% |
| Australia | 8 | 4% |
| Argentina | 6 | 3% |
| Chile | 5 | 3% |
| Spain | 4 | 2% |
| Japan | 3 | 2% |
| Colombia | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 20 | 10% |
| Unknown | 67 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 125 | 65% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 35 | 18% |
| Scientists | 28 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 234 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 234 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 46 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 7% |
| Researcher | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 51 | 22% |
| Unknown | 72 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 64 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 55 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 7% |
| Unknown | 84 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 126. 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 23 January 2022.
All research outputs
#330,400
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#174
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,031
of 331,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#7
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 331,155 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.