↓ Skip to main content

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation as a weaning strategy for intubated adults with respiratory failure

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
27 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
181 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
Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation as a weaning strategy for intubated adults with respiratory failure
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004127.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen EA Burns, Maureen O Meade, Azra Premji, Neill KJ Adhikari

Abstract

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) provides ventilatory support without the need for an invasive airway. Interest has emerged in using NPPV to facilitate earlier removal of an endotracheal tube and to decrease complications associated with prolonged intubation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 2 1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 175 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 17 9%
Other 15 8%
Student > Master 13 7%
Researcher 8 4%
Student > Bachelor 7 4%
Other 21 12%
Unknown 100 55%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 <1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 <1%
Other 4 2%
Unknown 103 57%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 December 2018.
All research outputs
#604,822
of 13,953,606 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,857
of 10,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,157
of 253,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#22
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,953,606 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 253,501 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 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.