↓ Skip to main content

Cardiac surgery, a right target for hyperoxia?

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
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
Cardiac surgery, a right target for hyperoxia?
Published in
Critical Care, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13054-016-1347-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie Boisramé-Helms, Peter Radermacher, Pierre Asfar

Abstract

In perioperative cardiac surgery period, supra-physiological arterial oxygen partial pressures is common practice, although there is no clear evidence of any benefit. Smit et al. have shown that a "conservative" approach did not improve hemodynamics, decrease oxidative stress or myocardial tissue damage, but was not associated with major deleterious event either. Here, we outline major oxygen friend or foes properties, which may partly explain the study results, and place the clinical trial from Smit et al. in a global context.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 16%
Student > Master 3 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Other 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 58%
Materials Science 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Unknown 6 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 June 2016.
All research outputs
#4,303,603
of 17,361,274 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,685
of 5,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,011
of 226,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#36
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,361,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,317 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.7. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 226,592 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.