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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Bronchial hygiene techniques in patients on mechanical ventilation: what are used and why?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Einstein (São Paulo), April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1590/s1679-45082018ao3856 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Isabela Naiara Evangelista Matilde, Raquel Afonso Caserta Eid, Andréia Ferreira Nunes, Alexandre Ricardo Pepe Ambrozin, Renata Henn Moura, Denise Carnieli-Cazati, Karina Tavares Timenetsky |
| Abstract |
Objective To analyze and describe the maneuvers most commonly used in clinical practice by physical therapists and the reasons for choosing them. Methods A prospective multicenter study using a questionnaire. The sample consisted of physical therapists from five hospitals (three private hospitals, a teaching hospital and a public hospital). Results A total of 185 questionnaires were filled in. Most professionals had graduated 6 to 10 years before and over had over 10 years of intensive care unit experience. The most often used maneuvers were vibrocompression, hyperinflation, postural drainage, tracheal suction and motor mobilization. The most frequent reason for choosing these maneuvers was "I notice they are more efficient in clinical practice." Conclusion Physical therapy is mostly based on individual experience acquired in the clinical practice, and not on the scientific literature. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 83 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 25 | 30% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 12% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 4% |
| Professor | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 33 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 1% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Unknown | 40 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 February 2020.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Einstein (São Paulo)
#503
of 576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#299,810
of 340,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Einstein (São Paulo)
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 340,059 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.