| Title |
Positive end‐expiratory pressure (PEEP) during anaesthesia for prevention of mortality and postoperative pulmonary complications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007922.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fabiano T Barbosa, Aldemar A Castro, Célio F de Sousa‐Rodrigues |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 210 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 204 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 31 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 18 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 18 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 8% |
| Other | 49 | 23% |
| Unknown | 48 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 104 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 18 | 9% |
| Unknown | 53 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 28 February 2016.
All research outputs
#6,401,150
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,678
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,575
of 243,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#147
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 243,680 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 239 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.