Title |
Interventions for preventing critical illness polyneuropathy and critical illness myopathy
|
---|---|
Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2014
|
DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd006832.pub3 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Greet Hermans, Bernard De Jonghe, Frans Bruyninckx, Greet Van den Berghe |
Abstract |
Critical illness polyneuropathy or myopathy (CIP/CIM) is a frequent complication in the intensive care unit (ICU) and is associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation, longer ICU stay and increased mortality. This is an interim update of a review first published in 2009 (Hermans 2009). It has been updated to October 2011, with further potentially eligible studies from a December 2013 search characterised as awaiting assessment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 3 | 33% |
United Kingdom | 2 | 22% |
Unknown | 4 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 6 | 67% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 22% |
Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 589 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Canada | 2 | <1% |
United States | 2 | <1% |
Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
Ireland | 1 | <1% |
France | 1 | <1% |
South Africa | 1 | <1% |
Chile | 1 | <1% |
Russia | 1 | <1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 578 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 98 | 17% |
Student > Bachelor | 66 | 11% |
Researcher | 59 | 10% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 50 | 8% |
Other | 44 | 7% |
Other | 131 | 22% |
Unknown | 141 | 24% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 223 | 38% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 88 | 15% |
Neuroscience | 16 | 3% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 3% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 2% |
Other | 62 | 11% |
Unknown | 172 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 12 October 2019.
All research outputs
#6,616,644
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,313
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,319
of 323,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#165
of 243 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 323,878 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 243 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.