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 |
Hypotension and hypovolemia during hemodialysis: is the usual suspect innocent?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-016-1307-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Berger, Jukka Takala |
| Abstract |
Hypotension during intermittent hemodialysis is common, and has been attributed to acute volume shifts, shifts in osmolarity, electrolyte imbalance, temperature changes, altered vasoregulation, and sheer hypovolemia. Although hypovolemia may intuitively seem a likely cause for hypotension in intensive care patients, its role in the pathogenesis of intradialytic hypotension may be overestimated. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 2 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 10% |
| Colombia | 2 | 10% |
| United States | 2 | 10% |
| Norway | 1 | 5% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 5% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 55% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 15% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 13% |
| Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 6 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 21% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 June 2016.
All research outputs
#3,240,770
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,635
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,751
of 357,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#79
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 357,341 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 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.