↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Medical anti-shock trousers (pneumatic anti-shock garments) for circulatory support in patients with trauma

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 1999
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 (88th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
Medical anti-shock trousers (pneumatic anti-shock garments) for circulatory support in patients with trauma
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 1999
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001856
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ian Roberts, Karen Blackhall, Karen Joanna Dickinson

Abstract

Medical antishock trousers (MAST) have been used to increase venous return to the heart until definitive care could be given. This, combined with compression of blood vessels, is believed to cause the movement of blood from the lower body to the brain, heart and lungs. However, the equipment is expensive, and may have adverse effects. To quantify the effect on mortality and morbidity of the use of medical anti-shock trousers (MAST)/ pneumatic anti-shock garments (PASG) in patients following trauma. Trials were identified by searches of the Cochrane Injuries Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIDS ISI Service and Science Citation Index. References in relevant papers identified were followed up. A citation analysis of references to randomised controlled trials was conducted using the Science Citation Index. Authors of identified trials were contacted and asked about any other trials that may have been conducted, whether published or unpublished. Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of MAST/PASG in patients following trauma (excluding fractures of the extremities in which MAST/PASG may be used as a splint). Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. Data were collected on mortality, duration of hospitalisation and ICU stay, and quality of allocation concealment. Two trials were identified that met the inclusion criteria. These trials included 1202 randomised patients in total; however, data for only 1075 of these were available. The relative risk of death with MAST was 1.13 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.32). Duration of hospitalisation and of intensive care unit stay was longer in the MAST treated group. The weighted mean difference in the length of intensive care unit stay was 1.7 days (95% CI 0.33 to 2.98). There is no evidence to suggest that MAST/PASG application reduces mortality, length of hospitalisation or length of ICU stay in trauma patients and it is possible that it may increase these. These data do not support the continued use of MAST/PASG in the situation described. However, it should be recognised that, due to the poor quality of the trials, conclusions should be drawn with caution.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Kazakhstan 1 1%
Unknown 66 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 16%
Researcher 11 16%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 12%
Professor 5 7%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 43%
Engineering 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 19 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 14 September 2021.
All research outputs
#1,783,593
of 19,140,651 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,207
of 11,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,259
of 245,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#109
of 251 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,140,651 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,934 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 245,818 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 251 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 56% of its contemporaries.