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 |
Acute lung injury: how to stabilize a broken lung
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-018-2051-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gary F. Nieman, Penny Andrews, Joshua Satalin, Kailyn Wilcox, Michaela Kollisch-Singule, Maria Madden, Hani Aiash, Sarah J. Blair, Louis A. Gatto, Nader M. Habashi |
| Abstract |
The pathophysiology of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) results in heterogeneous lung collapse, edema-flooded airways and unstable alveoli. These pathologic alterations in alveolar mechanics (i.e. dynamic change in alveolar size and shape with each breath) predispose the lung to secondary ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). It is our viewpoint that the acutely injured lung can be recruited and stabilized with a mechanical breath until it heals, much like casting a broken bone until it mends. If the lung can be "casted" with a mechanical breath, VILI could be prevented and ARDS incidence significantly reduced. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 122 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 14 | 11% |
| Spain | 9 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 7 | 6% |
| United States | 7 | 6% |
| Colombia | 6 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 2% |
| Uruguay | 2 | 2% |
| Argentina | 2 | 2% |
| Ecuador | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 21 | 17% |
| Unknown | 49 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 96 | 79% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 13 | 11% |
| Scientists | 11 | 9% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 184 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 38 | 21% |
| Researcher | 31 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 14 | 8% |
| Other | 44 | 24% |
| Unknown | 27 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 126 | 68% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 2% |
| Engineering | 3 | 2% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Unknown | 34 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 77. 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 15 April 2020.
All research outputs
#555,512
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#370
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,358
of 344,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#14
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 344,113 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.