↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

What is this page? Embed badge

Quantitative versus qualitative cultures of respiratory secretions for clinical outcomes in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
217 Mendeley
Summary Twitter Wikipedia
Title
Quantitative versus qualitative cultures of respiratory secretions for clinical outcomes in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006482.pub4
Pubmed ID
25354013
Authors

Danilo Cortozi Berton, Andre C Kalil, Paulo José Zimermann Teixeira

Abstract

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common infectious disease in intensive care units (ICUs). The best diagnostic approach to resolve this condition remains uncertain.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 217 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 216 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 33 15%
Student > Master 25 12%
Student > Bachelor 20 9%
Student > Postgraduate 17 8%
Other 14 6%
Other 44 20%
Unknown 64 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 85 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 4%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Other 26 12%
Unknown 72 33%

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 03 April 2019.
All research outputs
#5,530,733
of 22,769,322 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,375
of 12,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,346
of 260,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#161
of 248 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,769,322 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,313 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 260,456 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 248 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.

This page is hosted by Altmetric on behalf of Cochrane Library.