| Title |
Continuous positive airway pressure vs. proportional assist ventilation for noninvasive ventilation in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine, January 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00134-008-0998-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thierry Rusterholtz, Pierre-Edouard Bollaert, Marc Feissel, Florence Romano-Girard, Marie-Line Harlay, Michel Zaehringer, Benjamin Dusang, Philippe Sauder |
| Abstract |
To compare continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and proportional assist ventilation (PAV) as modes of noninvasive ventilatory support in patients with severe cardiogenic pulmonary edema. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 84 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 16% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 26 | 30% |
| Unknown | 8 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 57 | 66% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Psychology | 2 | 2% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 13% |
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 09 November 2011.
All research outputs
#13,357,126
of 22,656,971 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#3,687
of 4,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,439
of 155,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#14
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,656,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,967 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.5. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 155,043 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.