↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

High versus low positive end‐expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels for mechanically ventilated adult patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2021
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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
28 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
185 Mendeley
Title
High versus low positive end‐expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels for mechanically ventilated adult patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2021
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009098.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roberto Santa Cruz, Fernando Villarejo, Celica Irrazabal, Agustín Ciapponi

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 185 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 17 9%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Student > Master 16 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 8%
Researcher 10 5%
Other 27 15%
Unknown 84 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Social Sciences 3 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Other 9 5%
Unknown 87 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 25 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,522,938
of 25,462,162 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,287
of 12,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,368
of 454,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#50
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,462,162 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,766 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 454,075 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 139 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 64% of its contemporaries.