↓ Skip to main content

Noninvasive positive‐pressure ventilation as a weaning strategy for intubated adults with respiratory failure

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
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 (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
17 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
110 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
425 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Noninvasive positive‐pressure ventilation as a weaning strategy for intubated adults with respiratory failure
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004127.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen EA Burns, Maureen O Meade, Azra Premji, Neill KJ Adhikari

Abstract

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) provides ventilatory support without the need for an invasive airway. Interest has emerged in using NPPV to facilitate earlier removal of an endotracheal tube and to decrease complications associated with prolonged intubation.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 425 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 413 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 58 14%
Student > Bachelor 43 10%
Researcher 38 9%
Student > Postgraduate 33 8%
Other 31 7%
Other 91 21%
Unknown 131 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 187 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 55 13%
Social Sciences 7 2%
Psychology 7 2%
Neuroscience 6 1%
Other 23 5%
Unknown 140 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 April 2020.
All research outputs
#1,681,807
of 26,544,284 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,386
of 13,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,569
of 324,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#69
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,544,284 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,265 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 324,485 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 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.