↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Sleep quality and circadian rhythm disruption in the intensive care unit: a review

Overview of attention for article published in Nature and science of sleep, November 2017
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)

Mentioned by

twitter
31 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
Title
Sleep quality and circadian rhythm disruption in the intensive care unit: a review
Published in
Nature and science of sleep, November 2017
DOI 10.2147/nss.s151525
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuliya Boyko, Poul Jennum, Palle Toft

Abstract

Sleep and circadian rhythm are reported to be severely abnormal in critically ill patients. Disturbed sleep can lead to the development of delirium and, as a result, can be associated with prolonged stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and increased mortality. The standard criterion method of sleep assessment, polysomnography (PSG), is complicated in critically ill patients due to the practical challenges and interpretation difficulties. Several PSG sleep studies in the ICU reported the absence of normal sleep characteristics in many critically ill patients, making the standard method of sleep scoring insufficient in this patient group. Watson et al proposed a modified classification for sleep scoring in critically ill patients. This classification has not yet been validated. Sleep disturbance in the ICU is a multifactorial problem. The ICU environment, mechanical ventilation, medication, as well as the critical illness itself have been reported as important sleep disturbing factors. Secretion of sleep hormone, melatonin, expressing circadian rhythmicity was found abolished or phase delayed in critically ill patients. Various interventions have been tested in several studies aiming to improve sleep quality and circadian rhythm in the ICU. The results of these studies were inconclusive due to using the sleep assessment methods other than PSG or the absence of a reliable sleep scoring tool for the analysis of the PSG findings in this patient population. Development of a valid sleep scoring classification is essential for further sleep research in critically ill patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 116 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 14%
Researcher 12 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 37 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 20%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Psychology 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 39 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 21 February 2018.
All research outputs
#2,027,268
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Nature and science of sleep
#106
of 633 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,348
of 341,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature and science of sleep
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 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 633 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.7. 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 341,991 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 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.