| Title |
Comparison of animal‐derived surfactants for the prevention and treatment of respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd010249.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Neetu Singh, Henry L Halliday, Timothy P Stevens, Gautham Suresh, Roger Soll, Maria Ximena Rojas‐Reyes |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 | 2 | 29% |
| Peru | 1 | 14% |
| Australia | 1 | 14% |
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 29% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 29% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 29% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 254 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 253 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 31 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 11% |
| Researcher | 26 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 20 | 8% |
| Other | 50 | 20% |
| Unknown | 74 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 102 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 10 | 4% |
| Psychology | 5 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 29 | 11% |
| Unknown | 82 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 14 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,350,533
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,869
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,583
of 396,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#73
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th 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 done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 396,595 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 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 71% of its contemporaries.