↓ Skip to main content

Clinical review: The critical care management of the burn patient

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
57 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
292 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
Clinical review: The critical care management of the burn patient
Published in
Critical Care, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc12706
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jane A Snell, Ne-Hooi W Loh, Tushar Mahambrey, Kayvan Shokrollahi

Abstract

Between 4 and 22% of burn patients presenting to the emergency department are admitted to critical care. Burn injury is characterised by a hypermetabolic response with physiologic, catabolic and immune effects. Burn care has seen renewed interest in colloid resuscitation, a change in transfusion practice and the development of anti-catabolic therapies. A literature search was conducted with priority given to review articles, meta-analyses and well-designed large trials; paediatric studies were included where adult studies were lacking with the aim to review the advances in adult intensive care burn management and place them in the general context of day-to-day practical burn management.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 57 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 292 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 283 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 40 14%
Student > Postgraduate 39 13%
Student > Master 34 12%
Student > Bachelor 32 11%
Researcher 28 10%
Other 64 22%
Unknown 55 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 163 56%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 1%
Arts and Humanities 4 1%
Other 21 7%
Unknown 64 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. 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 26 September 2020.
All research outputs
#909,791
of 25,791,495 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#679
of 6,620 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,943
of 223,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#3
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,791,495 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,620 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 223,286 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.