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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
High Frequency Jet Ventilation in Respiratory Failure Secondary to Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection: A Case Series
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pediatrics, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fped.2016.00092 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kevin M. Valentine, Ajit A. Sarnaik, Hitesh S. Sandhu, Ashok P. Sarnaik |
| Abstract |
To describe the utility of high frequency jet ventilation (HFJV) as a rescue therapy in patients with respiratory failure secondary to respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) that was refractory to conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV). Descriptive study by retrospective review. Pediatric intensive care unit at a tertiary care children's hospital. Infants on mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure due to RSV. Use of HFJV. Eleven patients were placed on HFJV. There was sustained improvement in ventilation on HFJV with a mean decrease in PCO2 of 9 mmHg at 24 h and 11 mmHg at 72 h. There were no significant changes in oxygenation by oxygenation index. No patients required extracorporeal support or suffered pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, or subcutaneous emphysema. Ten out of 11 (91%) patients survived to discharge from the hospital. High frequency jet ventilation may represent an alternative therapy for RSV-induced respiratory failure that is refractory to CMV. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 36% |
| Other | 3 | 27% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 9% |
| Researcher | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 2 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 36% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 9% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 2 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 August 2016.
All research outputs
#18,468,369
of 22,884,315 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#3,363
of 6,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#257,869
of 336,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#29
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,884,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 336,882 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.