↓ Skip to main content

Reflex cough PEF as a predictor of successful extubation in neurological patients

Overview of attention for article published in Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
Reflex cough PEF as a predictor of successful extubation in neurological patients
Published in
Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia, August 2015
DOI 10.1590/s1806-37132015000004453
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fernanda Machado Kutchak, Andressa Maciel Debesaitys, Marcelo de Mello Rieder, Carla Meneguzzi, Amanda Soares Skueresky, Luiz Alberto Forgiarini Junior, Marino Muxfeldt Bianchin

Abstract

To evaluate the use of reflex cough PEF as a predictor of successful extubation in neurological patients who were candidates for weaning from mechanical ventilation. This was a cross-sectional study of 135 patients receiving mechanical ventilation for more than 24 h in the ICU of Cristo Redentor Hospital, in the city of Porto Alegre, Brazil. Reflex cough PEF, the rapid shallow breathing index, MIP, and MEP were measured, as were ventilatory, hemodynamic, and clinical parameters. The mean age of the patients was 47.8 ± 17 years. The extubation failure rate was 33.3%. A reflex cough PEF of < 80 L/min showed a relative risk of 3.6 (95% CI: 2.0-6.7), and the final Glasgow Coma Scale score showed a relative risk of 0.64 (95% CI: 0.51-0.83). For every 1-point increase in a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8, there was a 36% reduction in the risk of extubation failure. Reflex cough PEF and the Glasgow Coma Scale score are independent predictors of extubation failure in neurological patients admitted to the ICU.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 21%
Other 6 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 11 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 15%
Engineering 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 5 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 December 2016.
All research outputs
#9,755,982
of 17,359,532 outputs
Outputs from Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia
#95
of 324 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,809
of 269,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,359,532 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 324 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 269,658 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.