| Title |
Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd003212.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brigitte Lemyre, Marc-Olivier Deguise, Paige Benson, Haresh Kirpalani, Antonio G De Paoli, Peter G Davis |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Spain | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 84 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 17% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 22 | 25% |
| Unknown | 15 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 56 | 64% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 16 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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
#2,977,555
of 24,788,795 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,740
of 12,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,095
of 342,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#53
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,788,795 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,977 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 55% 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 342,453 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 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 61% of its contemporaries.