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 |
Histidine-rich glycoprotein as an excellent biomarker for sepsis and beyond
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-018-2127-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Masahiro Nishibori, Hidenori Wake, Hiroshi Morimatsu |
| Abstract |
Sepsis remains a critical problem with high morbidity and mortality worldwide. One of the problems we have in critical care is the need to find a good biomarker of sepsis to determine the existence of bacterial infection and the severity of patients. This would enable us to start appropriate treatment at an earlier stage of the disease course. We propose that decreases in the plasma protein histidine-rich glycoprotein (HRG) is an excellent biomarker of sepsis compared with the current markers. Based on the novel pathophysiological roles of HRG in the cascade of events during sepsis, we also discuss the potential for supplemental therapy with purified HRG. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | 6% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 6% |
| Comoros | 1 | 6% |
| France | 1 | 6% |
| Denmark | 1 | 6% |
| Philippines | 1 | 6% |
| Japan | 1 | 6% |
| Colombia | 1 | 6% |
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 18% |
| Scientists | 1 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 21% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
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 25 August 2018.
All research outputs
#4,083,782
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,910
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,643
of 341,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#65
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 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 55% 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 341,403 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.