The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Computed tomography (CT) angiography for confirmation of the clinical diagnosis of brain death
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009694.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tim Taylor, Rob A Dineen, Dale C Gardiner, Charmaine H Buss, Allan Howatson, Nathan L Pace |
| Abstract |
The diagnosis of death using neurological criteria (brain death) has profound social, legal and ethical implications. The diagnosis can be made using standard clinical tests examining for brain function, but in some patient populations and in some countries additional tests may be required. Computed tomography (CT) angiography, which is currently in wide clinical use, has been identified as one such test. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 180 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 180 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 11% |
| Other | 15 | 8% |
| Researcher | 13 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 39 | 22% |
| Unknown | 59 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 56 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 20 | 11% |
| Psychology | 6 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 23 | 13% |
| Unknown | 66 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 March 2019.
All research outputs
#3,084,635
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,731
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,852
of 239,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#105
of 225 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 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 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 239,526 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 225 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 53% of its contemporaries.