↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Wilderness medicine at high altitude: recent developments in the field

Overview of attention for article published in Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, September 2015
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 (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
Title
Wilderness medicine at high altitude: recent developments in the field
Published in
Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, September 2015
DOI 10.2147/oajsm.s89856
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neeraj M Shah, Sidra Hussain, Mark Cooke, John P O’Hara, Adrian Mellor

Abstract

Travel to high altitude is increasingly popular. With this comes an increased incidence of high-altitude illness and therefore an increased need to improve our strategies to prevent and accurately diagnose these. In this review, we provide a summary of recent advances of relevance to practitioners who may be advising travelers to altitude. Although the Lake Louise Score is now widely used as a diagnostic tool for acute mountain sickness (AMS), increasing evidence questions the validity of doing so, and of considering AMS as a single condition. Biomarkers, such as brain natriuretic peptide, are likely correlating with pulmonary artery systolic pressure, thus potential markers of the development of altitude illness. Established drug treatments include acetazolamide, nifedipine, and dexamethasone. Drugs with a potential to reduce the risk of developing AMS include nitrate supplements, propagators of nitric oxide, and supplemental iron. The role of exercise in the development of altitude illness remains hotly debated, and it appears that the intensity of exercise is more important than the exercise itself. Finally, despite copious studies demonstrating the value of preacclimatization in reducing the risk of altitude illness and improving performance, an optimal protocol to preacclimatize an individual remains elusive.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 1%
Unknown 88 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 17%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Professor 5 6%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 24 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 33%
Sports and Recreations 14 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 25 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 01 June 2016.
All research outputs
#4,524,477
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine
#82
of 260 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,974
of 276,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 260 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 276,789 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 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.