↓ Skip to main content

Interventions for noisy breathing in patients near to death

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2008
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 (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
112 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 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.
Title
Interventions for noisy breathing in patients near to death
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2008
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005177.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bee Wee, Richard Hillier

Abstract

Noisy breathing (death rattle) occurs in 23 to 92% of people who are dying. The cause of death rattle remains unproven but is presumed to be due to an accumulation of secretions in the airways. It is therefore managed physically (repositioning and clearing the upper airways of fluid with a mechanical sucker) or pharmacologically (with anticholinergic drugs).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 134 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 15%
Student > Postgraduate 20 14%
Student > Bachelor 20 14%
Other 17 12%
Researcher 15 11%
Other 32 23%
Unknown 14 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 39 28%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Psychology 3 2%
Other 9 6%
Unknown 20 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 04 June 2019.
All research outputs
#2,261,509
of 17,165,110 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,011
of 11,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,330
of 157,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#37
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,165,110 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,634 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 157,411 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 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 64% of its contemporaries.