| Title |
PEEP-induced changes in lung volume in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Two methods to estimate alveolar recruitment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00134-011-2333-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. Dellamonica, N. Lerolle, C. Sargentini, G. Beduneau, F. Di Marco, A. Mercat, J. C. M. Richard, J. L. Diehl, J. Mancebo, J. J. Rouby, Q. Lu, G. Bernardin, L. Brochard |
| Abstract |
Lung volumes, especially functional residual capacity (FRC), are decreased in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) contributes to increased end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) and to improved oxygenation, but differentiating recruitment of previously nonaerated lung units from distension of previously open lung units remains difficult. This study evaluated simple methods derived from bedside EELV measurements to assess PEEP-induced lung recruitment while monitoring strain. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 190 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 184 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 33 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 29 | 15% |
| Other | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 7% |
| Other | 44 | 23% |
| Unknown | 34 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 131 | 69% |
| Engineering | 7 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Unspecified | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 4% |
| Unknown | 38 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 27 April 2018.
All research outputs
#2,937,469
of 22,790,780 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#1,827
of 4,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,188
of 124,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#5
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,790,780 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 124,172 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.