The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 93 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Interventions for preventing intensive care unit delirium in adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009783.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Suzanne Forsyth Herling, Ingrid E Greve, Eduard E Vasilevskis, Ingrid Egerod, Camilla Bekker Mortensen, Ann Merete Møller, Helle Svenningsen, Thordis Thomsen |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 12 | 13% |
| United States | 6 | 6% |
| Brazil | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Ireland | 1 | 1% |
| Chile | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 62 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 56 | 60% |
| Scientists | 22 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 15 | 16% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 834 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 833 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 118 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 87 | 10% |
| Researcher | 69 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 61 | 7% |
| Other | 30 | 4% |
| Other | 124 | 15% |
| Unknown | 345 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 163 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 153 | 18% |
| Psychology | 29 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 22 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 2% |
| Other | 83 | 10% |
| Unknown | 364 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 30 September 2022.
All research outputs
#864,001
of 26,338,415 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,551
of 13,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,778
of 451,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#43
of 235 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,338,415 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 13,212 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.5. 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 451,718 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 235 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.