↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Monitoring intracranial pressure utilizing a novel pattern of brain multiparameters in the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
Monitoring intracranial pressure utilizing a novel pattern of brain multiparameters in the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, June 2016
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s106915
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hong-tao Sun, Maohua Zheng, Yanmin Wang, Yunfeng Diao, Wanyong Zhao, Zhengjun Wei

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical value of multiple brain parameters on monitoring intracranial pressure (ICP) procedures in the therapy of severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) utilizing mild hypothermia treatment (MHT) alone or a combination strategy with other therapeutic techniques. A total of 62 patients with sTBI (Glasgow Coma Scale score <8) were treated using mild hypothermia alone or mild hypothermia combined with conventional ICP procedures such as dehydration using mannitol, hyperventilation, and decompressive craniectomy. The multiple brain parameters, which included ICP, cerebral perfusion pressure, transcranial Doppler, brain tissue partial pressure of oxygen, and jugular venous oxygen saturation, were detected and analyzed. All of these measures can control the ICP of sTBI patients to a certain extent, but multiparameters associated with brain environment and functions have to be critically monitored simultaneously because some procedures of reducing ICP can cause side effects for long-term recovery in sTBI patients. The result suggested that multimodality monitoring must be performed during the process of mild hypothermia combined with conventional ICP procedures in order to safely target different clinical methods to specific patients who may benefit from an individual therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 23%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 12 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 21%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Computer Science 3 7%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 15 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 11 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,169,949
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,420
of 3,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,553
of 353,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#47
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,132 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 353,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.