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 |
Effect of thromboelastography (TEG®) and rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM®) on diagnosis of coagulopathy, transfusion guidance and mortality in trauma: descriptive systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-014-0518-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luis Teodoro Da Luz, Bartolomeu Nascimento, Ajith Kumar Shankarakutty, Sandro Rizoli, Neill KJ Adhikari |
| Abstract |
The understanding of coagulopathies in trauma has increased interest in thromboelastography (TEG®) and thromboelastometry (ROTEM®), which promptly evaluate the entire clotting process and may guide blood product therapy. Our objective was to review the evidence for their role in diagnosing early coagulopathies, guiding blood transfusion, and reducing mortality in injured patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 362 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 353 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 60 | 17% |
| Researcher | 50 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 42 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 37 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 30 | 8% |
| Other | 80 | 22% |
| Unknown | 63 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 222 | 61% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 3% |
| Psychology | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 30 | 8% |
| Unknown | 70 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 08 September 2017.
All research outputs
#2,267,349
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,991
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,603
of 263,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#12
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 263,753 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.