| Title |
Early nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus early nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm infants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd005384.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brigitte Lemyre, Marc-Olivier Deguise, Paige Benson, Haresh Kirpalani, Osayame A Ekhaguere, Peter G Davis |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 25% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Pakistan | 1 | 6% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 6% |
| India | 1 | 6% |
| Australia | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 22 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 44% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Engineering | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 21 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 10 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,907,607
of 24,820,264 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,182
of 12,981 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,678
of 345,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#32
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,820,264 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,981 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.0. 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 345,082 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 done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.