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 |
Optimizing mean arterial pressure in septic shock: a critical reappraisal of the literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-015-0794-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marc Leone, Pierre Asfar, Peter Radermacher, Jean-Louis Vincent, Claude Martin |
| Abstract |
Guidelines recommend that a mean arterial pressure (MAP) value greater than 65 mm Hg should be the initial blood pressure target in septic shock, but what evidence is there to support this statement? We searched Pubmed and Google Scholar by using the key words 'arterial pressure', 'septic shock', and 'norepinephrine' and retrieved human studies published between 1 January 2000 and 31 July 2014. We identified seven comparative studies: two randomized clinical trials and five observational studies. The results of the literature review suggest that a MAP target of 65 mm Hg is usually sufficient in patients with septic shock. However, a MAP of around 75 to 85 mm Hg may reduce the development of acute kidney injury in patients with chronic arterial hypertension. Because of the high prevalence of chronic arterial hypertension in patients who develop septic shock, this finding is of considerable importance. Future studies should assess interactions between time, fluid volumes administered, and doses of vasopressors. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 74 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 | 10 | 14% |
| United States | 9 | 12% |
| Turkey | 3 | 4% |
| Australia | 3 | 4% |
| Malaysia | 2 | 3% |
| Mexico | 2 | 3% |
| Puerto Rico | 2 | 3% |
| France | 2 | 3% |
| Colombia | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 16 | 22% |
| Unknown | 23 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 45 | 61% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 17 | 23% |
| Scientists | 10 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 278 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 273 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 34 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 34 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 30 | 11% |
| Other | 27 | 10% |
| Researcher | 26 | 9% |
| Other | 66 | 24% |
| Unknown | 61 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 157 | 56% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 3% |
| Engineering | 5 | 2% |
| Psychology | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 17 | 6% |
| Unknown | 69 | 25% |
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 21 February 2023.
All research outputs
#890,839
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#675
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,857
of 395,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#37
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 6,554 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 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 395,408 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 466 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 92% of its contemporaries.