↓ Skip to main content

Personalized physiological medicine

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Personalized physiological medicine
Published in
Critical Care, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1907-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Can Ince

Abstract

This paper introduces the concept of personalized physiological medicine that is specifically directed at the needs of the critically ill patient. This differs from the conventional view of personalized medicine, characterized by biomarkers and gene profiling, instead focusing on time-variant changes in the pathophysiology and regulation of various organ systems and their cellular and subcellular constituents. I propose that personalized physiological medicine is composed of four pillars relevant to the critically ill patient. Pillar 1 is defined by the frailty and fitness of the patient and their physiological reserve to cope with the stress of critical illness and therapy. Pillar 2 involves monitoring of the key physiological variables of the different organ systems and their response to disease and therapy. Pillar 3 concerns the evaluation of the success of resuscitation by assessment of the hemodynamic coherence between the systemic and microcirculation and parenchyma of the organ systems. Finally, pillar 4 is defined by the integration of the physiological and clinical data into a time-learning adaptive model of the patient to provide feedback about the function of organ systems and to guide and assess the response to disease and therapy. I discuss each pillar and describe the challenges to research and development that will allow the realization of personalized physiological medicine to be practiced at the bedside for critically ill patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 17%
Researcher 11 14%
Other 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Master 4 5%
Other 15 20%
Unknown 16 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 22 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 10 September 2019.
All research outputs
#4,141,197
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,960
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,921
of 448,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#75
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 448,935 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.