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 |
Towards solving enigmas in electrical injury
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, March 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc11209 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christopher Andrews |
| Abstract |
The paper by Park and colleagues in the previous issue of Critical Care highlights vascular changes in electrical injury and finds them to be relatively long-lasting and significant. This finding is consistent with long-lasting disability seen clinically in electrically injured patients. Furthermore, the authors report that the changes seen in the shocked part of the body are accompanied by similar changes that are measurable in other parts of the body but that are not involved with electric current. This latter finding is of significant importance. A psychological syndrome - consistent and predictable - exists following an electrical injury. The causation is enigmatic. Recent psychiatric research indicates the importance of circulating cortisol and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), which causes loss of hippocampal volume, in the genesis of depression. This psychiatric research has stimulated a speculative theory of the genesis of the psychological effects of electric shock. The paper by Park and colleagues is circumstantial support for the possibility that such a process is real and available. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 20 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 18% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 27% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 59% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 4 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 28 July 2014.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#5,876
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,392
of 168,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#85
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 168,628 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.