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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comparison of three different methods to confirm tracheal tube placement in emergency intubation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine, April 2002
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00134-002-1290-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Štefek Grmec |
| Abstract |
Verification of endotracheal tube placement is of vital importance, since unrecognized esophageal intubation can be rapidly fatal (death, brain damage). The aim of our study was to compare three different methods for immediate confirmation of tube placement: auscultation, capnometry and capnography in emergency conditions in the prehospital setting. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 127 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 19 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 9% |
| Researcher | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 9% |
| Other | 31 | 24% |
| Unknown | 31 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 67 | 52% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 9% |
| Engineering | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Unknown | 35 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 16 August 2018.
All research outputs
#2,619,008
of 22,919,505 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#1,731
of 4,996 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,806
of 120,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#1
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,919,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,996 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 120,641 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.