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 |
The effect of prone positioning on mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc13896 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shu Ling Hu, Hong Li He, Chun Pan, Ai Ran Liu, Song Qiao Liu, Ling Liu, Ying Zi Huang, Feng Mei Guo, Yi Yang, Hai Bo Qiu |
| Abstract |
Prone positioning (PP) has been reported to improve the survival of patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, it is uncertain whether the beneficial effects of PP are associated with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels and long durations of PP. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate whether the effects of PP on mortality could be affected by PEEP level and PP duration and to identify which patients might benefit the most from PP. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 7 | 25% |
| Spain | 5 | 18% |
| Italy | 2 | 7% |
| United States | 2 | 7% |
| Mexico | 1 | 4% |
| South Africa | 1 | 4% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 4% |
| Greece | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 57% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 18% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 14% |
| Scientists | 3 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 164 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 26 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 20 | 12% |
| Researcher | 17 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 8% |
| Other | 38 | 22% |
| Unknown | 35 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 88 | 51% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 29 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 7 | 4% |
| Unknown | 38 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 04 March 2016.
All research outputs
#2,075,058
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,859
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,218
of 241,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#16
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 241,293 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.