| Title |
Automated weaning and SBT systems versus non‐automated weaning strategies for weaning time in invasively ventilated critically ill adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd008638.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karen EA Burns, Francois Lellouche, Rosane Nisenbaum, Martin R Lessard, Jan O Friedrich |
| Abstract |
Automated systems use closed-loop control to enable ventilators to perform basic and advanced functions while supporting respiration. SmartCare™ is a unique automated weaning system that measures selected respiratory variables, adapts ventilator output to individual patient needs by operationalizing predetermined algorithms and automatically conducts spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) when predetermined thresholds are met. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 316 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 312 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 43 | 14% |
| Researcher | 30 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 9% |
| Other | 22 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 20 | 6% |
| Other | 68 | 22% |
| Unknown | 105 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 101 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 54 | 17% |
| Engineering | 8 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Psychology | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 29 | 9% |
| Unknown | 111 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,228,078
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,001
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,721
of 249,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#203
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 249,886 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.