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 |
Protocolized versus non‐protocolized weaning for reducing the duration of mechanical ventilation in critically ill adult patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd006904.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bronagh Blackwood, Karen EA Burns, Chris R Cardwell, Peter O'Halloran |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Lithuania | 1 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 13% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 5 | 63% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 88% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 448 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 439 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 59 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 51 | 11% |
| Researcher | 44 | 10% |
| Other | 39 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 7% |
| Other | 85 | 19% |
| Unknown | 137 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 160 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 65 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 2% |
| Psychology | 10 | 2% |
| Engineering | 7 | 2% |
| Other | 38 | 8% |
| Unknown | 157 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 04 June 2023.
All research outputs
#2,378,604
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,811
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,231
of 276,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#108
of 242 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 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 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 276,397 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 242 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 55% of its contemporaries.