↓ Skip to main content

Interventions for preventing critical illness polyneuropathy and critical illness myopathy

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2014
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 (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
78 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
348 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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 preventing critical illness polyneuropathy and critical illness myopathy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006832.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Greet Hermans, Bernard De Jonghe, Frans Bruyninckx, Greet Van den Berghe

Abstract

Critical illness polyneuropathy or myopathy (CIP/CIM) is a frequent complication in the intensive care unit (ICU) and is associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation, longer ICU stay and increased mortality. This is an interim update of a review first published in 2009 (Hermans 2009). It has been updated to October 2011, with further potentially eligible studies from a December 2013 search characterised as awaiting assessment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 348 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 337 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 77 22%
Researcher 45 13%
Student > Bachelor 40 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 10%
Student > Postgraduate 31 9%
Other 86 25%
Unknown 35 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 172 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 55 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 3%
Other 36 10%
Unknown 53 15%

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 12 October 2019.
All research outputs
#1,858,423
of 14,608,133 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,595
of 11,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,449
of 248,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#87
of 186 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,608,133 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,027 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 248,617 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 186 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 53% of its contemporaries.