↓ Skip to main content

A comparison of endotracheal tube compensation techniques for the measurement of respiratory mechanical impedance at low frequencies

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, December 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
A comparison of endotracheal tube compensation techniques for the measurement of respiratory mechanical impedance at low frequencies
Published in
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, December 2021
DOI 10.1007/s10877-021-00788-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 33%
Researcher 1 17%
Unknown 3 50%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 2 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 17%
Unknown 3 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 December 2021.
All research outputs
#16,499,892
of 26,866,770 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
#534
of 929 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#263,199
of 530,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
#9
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,866,770 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 929 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 530,485 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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 52% of its contemporaries.