↓ Skip to main content

Quantitative versus qualitative cultures of respiratory secretions for clinical outcomes in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 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 (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 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
Quantitative versus qualitative cultures of respiratory secretions for clinical outcomes in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006482.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Danilo Cortozi Berton, Andre C Kalil, Paulo José Zimermann Teixeira

Abstract

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common infectious disease in intensive care units (ICUs). The best diagnostic approach to resolve this condition remains uncertain.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 126 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 19%
Student > Master 19 15%
Student > Postgraduate 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Other 32 25%
Unknown 16 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 7%
Unspecified 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 26 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 03 April 2019.
All research outputs
#3,345,347
of 14,558,947 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,928
of 11,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,840
of 233,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#156
of 250 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,558,947 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,021 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.3. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 233,084 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 250 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.