| Title |
Early sedation and clinical outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients: a prospective multicenter cohort study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc13995 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lilian Maria Sobreira Tanaka, Luciano Cesar Pontes Azevedo, Marcelo Park, Guilherme Schettino, Antonio Paulo Nassar, Alvaro Réa-Neto, Luana Tannous, Vicente Ces de Souza-Dantas, André Torelly, Thiago Lisboa, Claudio Piras, Frederico Bruzzi Carvalho, Marcelo de Oliveira Maia, Fabio Poianas Giannini, Flavia Ribeiro Machado, Felipe Dal-Pizzol, Alexandre Guilherme Ribeiro de Carvalho, Ronaldo Batista dos Santos, Paulo Fernando Guimarães Morando Marzocchi Tierno, Marcio Soares, Jorge Ibrain Figueira Salluh, for the ERICC study investigators |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 5 | 31% |
| United States | 2 | 13% |
| Australia | 2 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 13% |
| Italy | 1 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Greece | 1 | 6% |
| Colombia | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 38% |
| Scientists | 4 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 19% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 19% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 159 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 20 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 12% |
| Other | 18 | 11% |
| Researcher | 18 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 38 | 23% |
| Unknown | 39 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 78 | 48% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 14% |
| Engineering | 8 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 7 | 4% |
| Unknown | 43 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 October 2018.
All research outputs
#2,304,615
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,006
of 6,627 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,345
of 241,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#21
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,627 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 241,680 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.