↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Cognitive responses to hypobaric hypoxia: implications for aviation training

Overview of attention for article published in Psychology Research and Behavior Management, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#39 of 550)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
Title
Cognitive responses to hypobaric hypoxia: implications for aviation training
Published in
Psychology Research and Behavior Management, November 2014
DOI 10.2147/prbm.s51844
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher Neuhaus, Jochen Hinkelbein

Abstract

The aim of this narrative review is to provide an overview on cognitive responses to hypobaric hypoxia and to show relevant implications for aviation training. A principal element of hypoxia-awareness training is the intentional evocation of hypoxia symptoms during specific training sessions within a safe and controlled environment. Repetitive training should enable pilots to learn and recognize their personal hypoxia symptoms. A time span of 3-6 years is generally considered suitable to refresh knowledge of the more subtle and early symptoms especially. Currently, there are two different technical approaches available to induce hypoxia during training: hypobaric chamber training and reduced-oxygen breathing devices. Hypoxia training for aircrew is extremely important and effective, and the hypoxia symptoms should be emphasized clearly to aircrews. The use of tight-fitting masks, leak checks, and equipment checks should be taught to all aircrew and reinforced regularly. It is noteworthy that there are major differences in the required quality and quantity of hypoxia training for both military and civilian pilots.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 18%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 26 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 24%
Neuroscience 7 7%
Sports and Recreations 7 7%
Engineering 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Other 24 23%
Unknown 28 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 10 July 2020.
All research outputs
#1,031,504
of 22,771,140 outputs
Outputs from Psychology Research and Behavior Management
#39
of 550 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,769
of 260,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychology Research and Behavior Management
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,771,140 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 550 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 260,565 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 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them