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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) versus pressure support ventilation: patient-ventilator interaction during invasive ventilation delivered by tracheostomy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, January 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-018-2288-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Olivier Lamouret, Laure Crognier, Fanny Vardon Bounes, Jean-Marie Conil, Caroline Dilasser, Thibaut Raimondi, Stephanie Ruiz, Antoine Rouget, Clément Delmas, Thierry Seguin, Vincent Minville, Bernard Georges |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 14% |
| United States | 2 | 10% |
| Japan | 1 | 5% |
| Mexico | 1 | 5% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Sweden | 1 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| France | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 71% |
| Scientists | 3 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 10% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 62 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 11 | 18% |
| Researcher | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 19% |
| Unknown | 16 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 52% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 20 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 January 2020.
All research outputs
#2,778,351
of 25,793,330 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,383
of 6,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,744
of 448,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#54
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,793,330 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,623 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 448,026 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 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.