↓ Skip to main content

Year in review 2013: Critical Care– out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, traumatic injury, and other emergency care conditions

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Year in review 2013: Critical Care– out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, traumatic injury, and other emergency care conditions
Published in
Critical Care, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13054-014-0593-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scott A Goldberg, Bryan Kharbanda, Paul E Pepe

Abstract

In this review, we discuss articles published in 2013 contributing to the existing literature on the management of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and the evaluation and management of several other emergency conditions, including traumatic injury. The utility of intravenous medications, including epinephrine and amiodarone, in the management of cardiac arrest is questioned, as are cardiac arrest termination-of-resuscitation rules. Articles discussing mode of transportation in trauma are evaluated, and novel strategies for outcome prediction in traumatic injury are proposed. Diagnostic strategies, including computerized tomography scan for the diagnosis of smoke inhalation injury and serum biomarkers for the diagnosis of post-cardiac arrest syndrome and acute aortic dissection, are also explored. Although many of the articles discussed raise more questions than they answer, they nevertheless provide ample opportunity for further investigation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Czechia 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 10 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 43%
Environmental Science 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Chemical Engineering 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 13 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 04 November 2014.
All research outputs
#7,960,052
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,224
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,318
of 274,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#90
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
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 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 274,442 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.