The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Spain | 1 | 20% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 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 | 140 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unspecified | 24 | 17% |
Researcher | 16 | 11% |
Other | 13 | 9% |
Student > Bachelor | 13 | 9% |
Student > Master | 9 | 6% |
Other | 34 | 24% |
Unknown | 35 | 24% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 63 | 44% |
Unspecified | 26 | 18% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 4% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 1% |
Other | 6 | 4% |
Unknown | 37 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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
#3,397,316
of 26,393,590 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,995
of 13,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,131
of 370,598 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#62
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,393,590 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 13,215 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 370,598 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 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 54% of its contemporaries.