↓ Skip to main content

Methylxanthine treatment for apnoea in preterm infants

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2010
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 (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
102 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Methylxanthine treatment for apnoea in preterm infants
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000140.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

David J Henderson-Smart, Antonio G De Paoli

Abstract

Recurrent apnoea is common in preterm infants, particularly at very early gestational ages. These episodes of ineffective breathing can lead to hypoxaemia and bradycardia that may be severe enough to require the use of positive pressure ventilation. Methylxanthines (such as caffeine, theophylline or aminophylline) have been used to stimulate breathing and reduce apnoea and its consequences.

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 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 134 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 17%
Student > Master 19 14%
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Other 14 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Other 37 26%
Unknown 16 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 78 56%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 6%
Psychology 4 3%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 13 9%
Unknown 21 15%

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 31 March 2020.
All research outputs
#1,470,770
of 15,348,605 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,925
of 11,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,474
of 217,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#181
of 519 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,348,605 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,158 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 217,740 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 519 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 65% of its contemporaries.