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 |
Early versus delayed selective surfactant treatment for neonatal respiratory distress syndrome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd001456.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Felicia L Bahadue, Roger Soll |
| Abstract |
Clinical trials have confirmed that surfactant therapy is effective in improving the immediate need for respiratory support and the clinical outcome of premature newborns. Trials have studied a wide variety of surfactant preparations used either to prevent (prophylactic or delivery room administration) or treat (selective or rescue administration) respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). Using either treatment strategy, significant reductions in the incidence of pneumothorax, as well as significant improvement in survival, have been noted. It is unclear whether there are any advantages to treating infants with respiratory insufficiency earlier in the course of RDS. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 281 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Ethiopia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 274 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 33 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 28 | 10% |
| Researcher | 27 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 27 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 24 | 9% |
| Other | 62 | 22% |
| Unknown | 80 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 131 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 2% |
| Other | 25 | 9% |
| Unknown | 83 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 23 May 2023.
All research outputs
#4,638,383
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,001
of 13,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,754
of 192,996 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#136
of 245 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,148 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 192,996 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 245 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.