↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation as a weaning strategy for intubated adults with respiratory failure

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
27 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
319 Mendeley
Title
Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation as a weaning strategy for intubated adults with respiratory failure
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004127.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen EA Burns, Maureen O Meade, Azra Premji, Neill KJ Adhikari

Abstract

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) provides ventilatory support without the need for an invasive airway. Interest has emerged in using NPPV to facilitate earlier removal of an endotracheal tube and to decrease complications associated with prolonged intubation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 319 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 307 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 51 16%
Researcher 41 13%
Student > Bachelor 37 12%
Student > Postgraduate 32 10%
Other 27 8%
Other 77 24%
Unknown 54 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 171 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 41 13%
Social Sciences 7 2%
Neuroscience 6 2%
Psychology 6 2%
Other 20 6%
Unknown 68 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 16 April 2020.
All research outputs
#837,797
of 17,457,801 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,178
of 11,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,602
of 272,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#24
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,457,801 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,696 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 272,711 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.