Title |
The Lund concept for severe traumatic brain injury
|
---|---|
Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
|
DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd010193.pub2 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Dario Muzevic, Bruno Splavski |
Abstract |
Severe traumatic brain injury is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Treatment strategies in management of such injuries are directed to the prevention of secondary brain ischaemia, as a consequence of disturbed post-traumatic cerebral blood flow. They are usually concerned with avoiding high intracranial pressure (ICP) or adequate cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP). An alternative to this conventional treatment is the Lund concept, which emphasises a reduction in microvascular pressures. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 | 3 | 43% |
United States | 1 | 14% |
Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 6 | 86% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 150 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 22 | 15% |
Student > Master | 19 | 13% |
Other | 14 | 9% |
Researcher | 14 | 9% |
Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 9% |
Other | 34 | 23% |
Unknown | 35 | 23% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 59 | 39% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 8% |
Psychology | 8 | 5% |
Neuroscience | 7 | 5% |
Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
Other | 19 | 13% |
Unknown | 41 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 05 February 2014.
All research outputs
#7,340,524
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,937
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,428
of 322,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#168
of 229 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 322,237 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 229 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.