↓ Skip to main content

Permissive hypoxaemia versus normoxaemia for mechanically ventilated critically ill patients

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 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
Permissive hypoxaemia versus normoxaemia for mechanically ventilated critically ill patients
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009931.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edward T Gilbert-Kawai, Kay Mitchell, Daniel Martin, John Carlisle, Michael PW Grocott

Abstract

Permissive hypoxaemia describes a concept in which a lower level of arterial oxygenation (PaO2) than usual is accepted to avoid the detrimental effects of high fractional inspired oxygen and invasive mechanical ventilation. Currently however, no specific threshold is known that defines permissive hypoxaemia, and its use in adults remains formally untested. The importance of this systematic review is thus to determine whether any substantial evidence is available to support the notion that permissive hypoxaemia may improve clinical outcomes in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 113 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 15%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Other 9 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 8%
Other 30 26%
Unknown 24 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 61 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 10%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 27 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 23 September 2014.
All research outputs
#2,979,981
of 12,361,817 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,713
of 8,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,892
of 197,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#108
of 181 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,361,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,459 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 197,258 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 181 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.