| Title |
Clinical ethics recommendations for the allocation of intensive care treatments in exceptional, resource-limited circumstances: the Italian perspective during the COVID-19 epidemic
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, April 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-020-02891-w |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marco Vergano, Guido Bertolini, Alberto Giannini, Giuseppe R. Gristina, Sergio Livigni, Giovanni Mistraletti, Luigi Riccioni, Flavia Petrini |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 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 | 4 | 17% |
| Italy | 2 | 9% |
| Greece | 1 | 4% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| Turkey | 1 | 4% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 8 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 18 | 78% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 9% |
| Scientists | 2 | 9% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 275 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 275 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 34 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 31 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 11% |
| Other | 21 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 5% |
| Other | 62 | 23% |
| Unknown | 83 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 85 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 4% |
| Psychology | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 48 | 17% |
| Unknown | 90 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,722,310
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,510
of 6,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,195
of 404,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#56
of 180 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,589 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 77% 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 404,805 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 180 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 69% of its contemporaries.