↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Effects of sevoflurane versus other general anaesthesia on emergence agitation in children

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 tweeters
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
168 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
469 Mendeley
Title
Effects of sevoflurane versus other general anaesthesia on emergence agitation in children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007084.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Costi, Allan M Cyna, Samira Ahmed, Kate Stephens, Penny Strickland, James Ellwood, Jessica N Larsson, Cheryl Chooi, Laura L Burgoyne, Philippa Middleton

Abstract

Sevoflurane is an inhaled volatile anaesthetic that is widely used in paediatric anaesthetic practice. Since its introduction, postoperative behavioural disturbance known as emergence agitation (EA) or emergence delirium (ED) has been recognized as a problem that may occur during recovery from sevoflurane anaesthesia. For the purpose of this systematic review, EA has been used to describe this clinical entity. A child with EA may be restless, may cause self-injury or may disrupt the dressing, surgical site or indwelling devices, leading to the potential for parents to be dissatisfied with their child's anaesthetic. To prevent such outcomes, the child may require pharmacological or physical restraint. Sevoflurane may be a major contributing factor in the development of EA. Therefore, an evidence-based understanding of the risk/benefit profile regarding sevoflurane compared with other general anaesthetic agents and adjuncts would facilitate its rational and optimal use.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 469 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 462 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 74 16%
Student > Bachelor 48 10%
Researcher 47 10%
Other 35 7%
Unspecified 32 7%
Other 117 25%
Unknown 116 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 184 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 41 9%
Unspecified 33 7%
Psychology 25 5%
Social Sciences 11 2%
Other 41 9%
Unknown 134 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 03 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,656,300
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,769
of 12,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,934
of 243,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#66
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,313 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 243,384 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 220 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 70% of its contemporaries.