↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Methylxanthine treatment for apnoea in preterm infants

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2010
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 (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
139 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Methylxanthine treatment for apnoea in preterm infants
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000140.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

David J Henderson-Smart, Antonio G De Paoli

Abstract

Recurrent apnoea is common in preterm infants, particularly at very early gestational ages. These episodes of ineffective breathing can lead to hypoxaemia and bradycardia that may be severe enough to require the use of positive pressure ventilation. Methylxanthines (such as caffeine, theophylline or aminophylline) have been used to stimulate breathing and reduce apnoea and its consequences.

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.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 192 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 29 15%
Researcher 28 14%
Student > Master 25 13%
Student > Postgraduate 18 9%
Other 17 9%
Other 48 24%
Unknown 32 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 99 50%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 19 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 5%
Psychology 6 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 3%
Other 18 9%
Unknown 40 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 21 October 2020.
All research outputs
#1,593,764
of 19,188,609 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,836
of 11,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,329
of 231,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#151
of 497 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,188,609 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,943 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 231,518 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 497 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 69% of its contemporaries.