| Title |
Prophylactic methylxanthines for endotracheal extubation in preterm infants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd000139.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David J Henderson-Smart, Peter G Davis |
| Abstract |
Weaning and extubating preterm infants on intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) for respiratory failure may be difficult. A significant contributing factor is thought to be the relatively poor respiratory drive and tendency to develop hypercarbia and apnoea, particularly in very preterm infants. Methylxanthine treatment started before extubation might stimulate breathing and increase the chances of successful weaning from IPPV. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 170 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 25 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 6% |
| Other | 39 | 23% |
| Unknown | 45 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 77 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 4% |
| Psychology | 5 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 9% |
| Unknown | 52 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 26 January 2011.
All research outputs
#3,258,599
of 22,705,019 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,936
of 12,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,137
of 180,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#37
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,705,019 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,312 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 180,371 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 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.