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 |
Maintenance of tracheal tube cuff pressure: where are the limits?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, January 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc6194 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Miquel Ferrer, Antoni Torres |
| Abstract |
Continuous control of tracheal tube cuff inflation using a pneumatic device resulted in severe tracheal wall damage in ventilated piglets. This damage was similar in piglets managed with manual control of cuff inflation. The periodic hyperinflation of the tube cuff used in both groups of this study may explain these results. This manoeuvre should be avoided in clinical practice. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 22% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 16% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 22% |
| Unknown | 3 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 63% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 9% |
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 26 December 2012.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#5,469
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,444
of 166,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#19
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 166,881 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.