↓ Skip to main content

Positive end-expiratory pressure for preterm infants requiring conventional mechanical ventilation for respiratory distress syndrome or bronchopulmonary dysplasia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
50 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 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
Positive end-expiratory pressure for preterm infants requiring conventional mechanical ventilation for respiratory distress syndrome or bronchopulmonary dysplasia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004500.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicolas Bamat, Julie Fierro, Yifei Wang, David Millar, Haresh Kirpalani

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 50 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 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 126 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 29 23%
Student > Master 17 13%
Researcher 16 13%
Student > Postgraduate 6 5%
Other 6 5%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 33 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 15%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Psychology 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 43 34%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 2019.
All research outputs
#775,388
of 17,371,891 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,002
of 11,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,570
of 275,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#14
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,371,891 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,662 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 275,130 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 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 50% of its contemporaries.