↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Metered dose inhalers versus nebulizers for aerosol bronchodilator delivery for adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation in critical care units

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
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 (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
184 Mendeley
Title
Metered dose inhalers versus nebulizers for aerosol bronchodilator delivery for adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation in critical care units
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008863.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Agi Holland, Fiona Smith, Kay Penny, Gill McCrossan, Linda Veitch, Caroline Nicholson

Abstract

Nebulizers and metered dose inhalers (MDI) have both been adapted for delivering aerosol bronchodilation to mechanically ventilated patients, but there is incomplete knowledge as to the most effective method of delivery.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 182 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 14%
Student > Bachelor 16 9%
Other 15 8%
Researcher 13 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 7%
Other 32 17%
Unknown 70 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 27 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Unspecified 4 2%
Other 11 6%
Unknown 75 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 2022.
All research outputs
#5,118,975
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,047
of 11,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,844
of 210,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#166
of 279 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 210,068 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 279 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.