You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Is inhaled prophylactic heparin useful for prevention and Management of Pneumonia in ventilated ICU patients? The IPHIVAP investigators of the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Critical Care, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jcrc.2016.04.005 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hiran Bandeshe, Rob Boots, Joel Dulhunty, Rachael Dunlop, Anthony Holley, Paul Jarrett, Charles D. Gomersall, Jeff Lipman, Thomas Lo, Steven O'Donoghue, Jenny Paratz, David Paterson, Jason A. Roberts, Therese Starr, Di Stephens, Janine Stuart, Jane Thomas, Andrew Udy, Hayden White |
| Abstract |
To determine whether prophylactic inhaled heparin is effective for the prevention and treatment of pneumonia patients receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) in the intensive care unit. A phase 2, double blind randomized controlled trial stratified for study center and patient type (non-operative, post-operative) was conducted in three university-affiliated intensive care units. Patients aged ≥18years and requiring invasive MV for more than 48hours were randomized to usual care, nebulization of unfractionated sodium heparin (5000 units in 2mL) or placebo nebulization with 0.9% sodium chloride (2mL) four times daily with the main outcome measures of the development of ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP), ventilator associated complication (VAC) and sequential organ failure assessment scores in patients with pneumonia on admission or who developed VAP. Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12612000038897. Two hundred and fourteen patients were enrolled (72 usual care, 71 inhaled sodium heparin, 71 inhaled sodium chloride). There were no differences between treatment groups in terms of the development of VAP, using either Klompas criteria (6-7%, P=1.00) or clinical diagnosis (24-26%, P=0.85). There was no difference in the clinical consistency (P=0.70), number (P=0.28) or the total volume of secretions per day (P=.54). The presence of blood in secretions was significantly less in the usual care group (P=0.005). Nebulized heparin cannot be recommended for prophylaxis against VAP or to hasten recovery from pneumonia in patients receiving MV. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 15% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Unknown | 25 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 27 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. 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 December 2023.
All research outputs
#863,818
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Critical Care
#62
of 2,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,370
of 315,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Critical Care
#2
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,469 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 315,676 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.