↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Music interventions for mechanically ventilated patients

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2014
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
3 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
20 tweeters
facebook
14 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
109 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
508 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Music interventions for mechanically ventilated patients
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006902.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joke Bradt, Cheryl Dileo

Abstract

Mechanical ventilation often causes major distress and anxiety in patients. The sensation of breathlessness, frequent suctioning, inability to talk, uncertainty regarding surroundings or condition, discomfort, isolation from others, and fear contribute to high levels of anxiety. Side effects of analgesia and sedation may lead to the prolongation of mechanical ventilation and, subsequently, to a longer length of hospitalization and increased cost. Therefore, non-pharmacological interventions should be considered for anxiety and stress management. Music interventions have been used to reduce anxiety and distress and improve physiological functioning in medical patients; however, their efficacy for mechanically ventilated patients needs to be evaluated. This review was originally published in 2010 and was updated in 2014.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 508 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 5 <1%
India 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 499 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 78 15%
Student > Bachelor 67 13%
Other 50 10%
Researcher 47 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 7%
Other 117 23%
Unknown 114 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 155 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 87 17%
Psychology 62 12%
Social Sciences 16 3%
Arts and Humanities 11 2%
Other 50 10%
Unknown 127 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 50. 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 May 2022.
All research outputs
#698,533
of 22,513,236 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,449
of 12,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,151
of 349,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#36
of 245 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,513,236 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 349,995 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 245 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.