↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation after extubation from moderate positive end-expiratory pressure level in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery: a prospective…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Intensive Care, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Evaluation of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation after extubation from moderate positive end-expiratory pressure level in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery: a prospective observational study
Published in
Journal of Intensive Care, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/2052-0492-2-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takeshi Suzuki, Takuya Kurazumi, Shinya Toyonaga, Yuya Masuda, Yoshihisa Morita, Junichi Masuda, Shizuko Kosugi, Nobuyuki Katori, Hiroshi Morisaki

Abstract

It remains to be clarified if the application of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) is effective after extubation in patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure who require the sufficient level of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). This study was aimed at examining the effect and the safety of NPPV application following extubation in patients requiring moderate PEEP level for sufficient oxygenation after cardiovascular surgery.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 33 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 18%
Other 6 18%
Student > Postgraduate 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 5 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 24%
Psychology 2 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 4 12%

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 19 December 2014.
All research outputs
#7,450,669
of 8,617,105 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
#187
of 199 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,882
of 245,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
#9
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,617,105 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 199 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 245,036 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.