| Title |
Is treatment with a high flow nasal cannula effective in acute viral bronchiolitis? A physiologic study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00134-013-2879-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christophe Milési, Julien Baleine, Stefan Matecki, Sabine Durand, Clémentine Combes, Aline Rideau Batista Novais, Gilles Combonie |
| Abstract |
The high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has recently been proposed to support infants with respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)-related respiratory distress. However, in this disease, no physiologic data are currently available on the effects of this device. We assessed the capacity of HFNC to generate positive airway pressure, as well as the resulting effects on breathing pattern and respiratory effort. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Congo | 1 | 50% |
| Kuwait | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 250 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 245 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 34 | 14% |
| Other | 33 | 13% |
| Researcher | 31 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 26 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 9% |
| Other | 59 | 24% |
| Unknown | 45 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 154 | 62% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 6% |
| Engineering | 9 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 3% |
| Unknown | 56 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 09 April 2020.
All research outputs
#3,587,135
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#1,963
of 4,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,432
of 196,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#11
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 196,101 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.