↓ Skip to main content

Heliox for non-intubated acute asthma patients

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2006
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 (84th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
94 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Heliox for non-intubated acute asthma patients
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2006
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002884.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gustavo J Rodrigo, Charles V Pollack, Carlos Rodrigo, Brian H Rowe

Abstract

Helium and oxygen mixtures (heliox), have been used sporadically in respiratory medicine for decades. Their use in acute respiratory emergencies such as asthma has been the subject of considerable debate. Despite the lapse of more than 60 years since it was first proposed, the role of heliox in treating patients with severe acute asthma remains unclear.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 115 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 16 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 13%
Researcher 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Postgraduate 11 9%
Other 37 32%
Unknown 11 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 68 59%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 18 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 26 September 2016.
All research outputs
#1,727,898
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,870
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,541
of 190,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#91
of 191 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 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 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 190,434 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 191 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 52% of its contemporaries.