↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Tracheal suctioning without disconnection in intubated ventilated neonates

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 Mendeley
Title
Tracheal suctioning without disconnection in intubated ventilated neonates
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003065.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jacqueline E Taylor, Glenda Hawley, Vicki Flenady, Paul G Woodgate

Abstract

Assisted mechanical ventilation is a necessity in the neonatal population for a variety of respiratory and surgical conditions. However, there are a number of potential hazards associated with this life saving intervention. New suctioning techniques have been introduced into clinical practice which aim to prevent or reduce these untoward effects.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 116 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 13 11%
Other 12 10%
Student > Master 12 10%
Researcher 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Other 31 26%
Unknown 28 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 14%
Psychology 5 4%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 28 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 25 July 2012.
All research outputs
#2,546,017
of 22,659,164 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,166
of 12,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,251
of 240,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#61
of 212 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,659,164 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 240,804 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 212 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.