| 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. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters 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 286 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 | 282 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 43 | 15% |
| Researcher | 29 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 19 | 7% |
| Other | 58 | 20% |
| Unknown | 93 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 94 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 50 | 17% |
| Engineering | 8 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Psychology | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 24 | 8% |
| Unknown | 98 | 34% |
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
#13,751,991
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,281
of 12,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,871
of 239,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#202
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.8. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 239,862 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.