↓ Skip to main content

Incidence of propofol-related infusion syndrome in critically ill adults: a prospective, multicenter study

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, October 2009
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 (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
43 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
179 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
185 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Incidence of propofol-related infusion syndrome in critically ill adults: a prospective, multicenter study
Published in
Critical Care, October 2009
DOI 10.1186/cc8145
Pubmed ID
Authors

Russel J Roberts, Jeffrey F Barletta, Jeffrey J Fong, Greg Schumaker, Philip J Kuper, Stella Papadopoulos, Dinesh Yogaratnam, Elise Kendall, Renee Xamplas, Anthony T Gerlach, Paul M Szumita, Kevin E Anger, Paul A Arpino, Stacey A Voils, Philip Grgurich, Robin Ruthazer, John W Devlin

Abstract

While propofol is associated with an infusion syndrome (PRIS) that may cause death, the incidence of PRIS is unknown. Determining the incidence of PRIS and the frequency of PRIS-related clinical manifestations are key steps prior to the completion of any controlled studies investigating PRIS. This prospective, multicenter study sought to determine the incidence of PRIS and PRIS-related clinical manifestations in a large cohort of critically ill adults prescribed propofol.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 43 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 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
Spain 2 1%
United States 2 1%
France 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 173 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 37 20%
Researcher 27 15%
Student > Postgraduate 19 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 16 9%
Student > Master 13 7%
Other 47 25%
Unknown 26 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 122 66%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Physics and Astronomy 3 2%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 9 5%
Unknown 36 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 44. 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 22 November 2023.
All research outputs
#945,876
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#727
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,466
of 107,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#1
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% 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 done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 107,977 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 34 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 97% of its contemporaries.