| Title |
Sleeping well
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7015-11-19 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mithu Sen, G Bryan Young |
| Abstract |
In a study by Cruse et al. published in BMC Medicine, patients with severe brain damage who were in the Vegetative or Minimally Conscious States (VS or MCS, respectively) from traumatic and nontraumatic etiologies had assessments of circadian rhythms using an actigraph, a device worn on a limb to evaluate circadian rhythmicity, in this population. This is a novel approach and is being used as a surrogate for polysomnography and other reference standards. Cruse et al. showed more disruption in circadian rhythms in the VS when compared to the MCS. This suggests that more brain injury occurs in the areas that control circadian rhythmicity in VS than in MCS patients. The study provides opportunities for improved prognostication and rehabilitation strategies in this patient population. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 36% |
| Professor | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 1 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 27% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 18% |
| Psychology | 2 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 18% |
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 03 April 2013.
All research outputs
#13,880,538
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,848
of 3,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,183
of 280,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#73
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,400 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 280,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.