↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Non‐invasive positive pressure ventilation for prevention of complications after pulmonary resection in lung cancer patients

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
193 Mendeley
Title
Non‐invasive positive pressure ventilation for prevention of complications after pulmonary resection in lung cancer patients
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010355.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria FS Torres, Gustavo JM Porfírio, Alan PV Carvalho, Rachel Riera

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 193 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 192 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 11%
Student > Master 20 10%
Other 12 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 6%
Researcher 9 5%
Other 29 15%
Unknown 91 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 11%
Sports and Recreations 5 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Psychology 3 2%
Other 11 6%
Unknown 96 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 26 December 2019.
All research outputs
#7,351,179
of 26,243,859 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,704
of 13,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,311
of 369,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#136
of 190 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,243,859 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,196 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.6. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 369,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 190 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.