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 |
Closed-loop assisted versus manual goal-directed fluid therapy during high-risk abdominal surgery: a case–control study with propensity matching
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-015-0827-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joseph Rinehart, Marc Lilot, Christine Lee, Alexandre Joosten, Trish Huynh, Cecilia Canales, David Imagawa, Aram Demirjian, Maxime Cannesson |
| Abstract |
Goal-directed fluid therapy strategies have been shown to benefit moderate- to high-risk surgery patients. Despite this, these strategies are often not implemented. The aim of this study was to assess a closed-loop fluid administration system in a surgical cohort and compare that to matched patients who received manual management. Our hypothesis was that the patients receiving closed-loop assistance would spend more time in a preload independent state, defined as percent of case time with stroke volume variation less than or equal to 12%. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Puerto Rico | 2 | 18% |
| France | 1 | 9% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 9% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 45% |
| Members of the public | 5 | 45% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 91 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 20 | 21% |
| Unknown | 20 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 49 | 52% |
| Engineering | 8 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 27 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 23 May 2015.
All research outputs
#4,483,376
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,973
of 6,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,332
of 387,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#361
of 575 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 387,379 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 575 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.