↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Timing and volume of fluid administration for patients with bleeding

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
29 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
247 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Timing and volume of fluid administration for patients with bleeding
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002245.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Irene Kwan, Frances Bunn, Paul Chinnock, Ian Roberts

Abstract

Treatment of haemorrhagic shock involves maintaining blood pressure and tissue perfusion until bleeding is controlled. Different resuscitation strategies have been used to maintain the blood pressure in trauma patients until bleeding is controlled. However, while maintaining blood pressure may prevent shock, it may worsen bleeding.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 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 247 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Kazakhstan 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Andorra 1 <1%
Unknown 241 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 47 19%
Student > Master 33 13%
Other 25 10%
Researcher 19 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 8%
Other 57 23%
Unknown 47 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 129 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 2%
Social Sciences 6 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 13 5%
Unknown 57 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 17 May 2019.
All research outputs
#996,944
of 22,747,498 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,211
of 12,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,683
of 221,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#50
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,747,498 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 221,294 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 239 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.