↓ Skip to main content

Neuroprotection in acute brain injury: an up-to-date review

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, December 2015
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
91 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
122 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
491 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
Neuroprotection in acute brain injury: an up-to-date review
Published in
Critical Care, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13054-015-0887-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nino Stocchetti, Fabio S Taccone, Giuseppe Citerio, Paul E Pepe, Peter D Le Roux, Mauro Oddo, Kees H Polderman, Robert D Stevens, William Barsan, Andrew IR Maas, Geert Meyfroidt, Michael J Bell, Robert Silbergleit, Paul M Vespa, Alan I Faden, Raimund Helbok, Samuel Tisherman, Elisa R Zanier, Terence Valenzuela, Julia Wendon, David K Menon, Jean-Louis Vincent

Abstract

Neuroprotective strategies that limit secondary tissue loss and/or improve functional outcomes have been identified in multiple animal models of ischemic, hemorrhagic, traumatic and nontraumatic cerebral lesions. However, use of these potential interventions in human randomized controlled studies has generally given disappointing results. In this paper, we summarize the current status in terms of neuroprotective strategies, both in the immediate and later stages of acute brain injury in adults. We also review potential new strategies and highlight areas for future research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 91 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 491 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 1%
Italy 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 470 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 71 14%
Researcher 61 12%
Student > Postgraduate 54 11%
Student > Bachelor 50 10%
Student > Master 48 10%
Other 134 27%
Unknown 73 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 276 56%
Neuroscience 43 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 3%
Other 45 9%
Unknown 86 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 63. 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 September 2021.
All research outputs
#689,060
of 25,587,485 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#466
of 6,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,359
of 396,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#25
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,587,485 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,587 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 396,618 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 97% 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 94% of its contemporaries.