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 |
Acute respiratory distress syndrome: does histology matter?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-015-1022-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
José A. Lorente, Aida Ballén-Barragán, Raquel Herrero, Andrés Esteban |
| Abstract |
Kao et al. have reported in Critical Care the histological findings of 101 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) undergoing open lung biopsy. Diffuse alveolar damage (DAD), the histological hallmark of ARDS, was present in only 56.4 % of cases. The presence of DAD was associated with higher mortality. Evidence from this and other studies indicates that the clinical criteria for the diagnosis of ARDS identify DAD in only about half of the cases. On the contrary, there is evidence that the clinical course and outcome of ARDS differs in patients with DAD and in patients without DAD. The discovery of biomarkers for the physiological (increased alveolocapillary permeability) or histological (DAD) hallmarks of ARDS is thus of paramount importance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 13% |
| Argentina | 1 | 7% |
| Spain | 1 | 7% |
| Greece | 1 | 7% |
| Colombia | 1 | 7% |
| Kuwait | 1 | 7% |
| Mexico | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 60% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 37 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 32% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 4 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 68% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 6 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 07 February 2021.
All research outputs
#2,247,816
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,967
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,444
of 395,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#145
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 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 395,421 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 90% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.