↓ Skip to main content

Extubation failure in pediatric intensive care: A multiple-center study of risk factors and outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care Medicine, November 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent
guideline
4 clinical guideline sources

Readers on

mendeley
224 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
Extubation failure in pediatric intensive care: A multiple-center study of risk factors and outcomes
Published in
Critical Care Medicine, November 2003
DOI 10.1097/01.ccm.0000094228.90557.85
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen C. Kurachek, Christopher J. Newth, Michael W. Quasney, Tom Rice, Ramesh C. Sachdeva, Neal R. Patel, Jeanne Takano, Larry Easterling, Mathew Scanlon, Ndidiamaka Musa, Richard J. Brilli, Dan Wells, Gary S. Park, Scott Penfil, Kris G. Bysani, Michael A. Nares, Lia Lowrie, Michael Billow, Emilie Chiochetti, Bruce Lindgren

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 4 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 224 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 %
United States 3 1%
Japan 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 217 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 36 16%
Student > Master 25 11%
Researcher 24 11%
Student > Postgraduate 24 11%
Student > Bachelor 16 7%
Other 39 17%
Unknown 60 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 123 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 5%
Engineering 7 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 1%
Unspecified 2 <1%
Other 7 3%
Unknown 70 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 01 April 2025.
All research outputs
#2,724,975
of 34,492,055 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care Medicine
#1,971
of 11,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,473
of 81,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care Medicine
#5
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,492,055 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,991 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 81,934 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 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.