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 |
Diagnosis and management of inhalation injury: an updated review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-015-1077-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick F. Walker, Michelle F. Buehner, Leslie A. Wood, Nathan L. Boyer, Ian R. Driscoll, Jonathan B. Lundy, Leopoldo C. Cancio, Kevin K. Chung |
| Abstract |
In this article we review recent advances made in the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of inhalation injury. Historically, the diagnosis of inhalation injury has relied on nonspecific clinical exam findings and bronchoscopic evidence. The development of a grading system and the use of modalities such as chest computed tomography may allow for a more nuanced evaluation of inhalation injury and enhanced ability to prognosticate. Supportive respiratory care remains essential in managing inhalation injury. Adjuncts still lacking definitive evidence of efficacy include bronchodilators, mucolytic agents, inhaled anticoagulants, nonconventional ventilator modes, prone positioning, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Recent research focusing on molecular mechanisms involved in inhalation injury has increased the number of potential therapies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 105 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 | 16 | 15% |
| United States | 10 | 10% |
| Spain | 7 | 7% |
| Mexico | 4 | 4% |
| Italy | 3 | 3% |
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| Ecuador | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Malaysia | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 12% |
| Unknown | 44 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 71 | 68% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 20 | 19% |
| Scientists | 8 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 6 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 361 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 357 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 60 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 48 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 43 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 33 | 9% |
| Researcher | 32 | 9% |
| Other | 67 | 19% |
| Unknown | 78 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 202 | 56% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 31 | 9% |
| Engineering | 9 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 22 | 6% |
| Unknown | 88 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 77. 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 29 September 2020.
All research outputs
#566,377
of 25,918,104 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#373
of 6,626 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,238
of 399,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#19
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,918,104 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 6,626 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 94% 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 399,880 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 95% of its contemporaries.