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 |
Early use of imipenem/cilastatin and vancomycin followed by de-escalation versus conventional antimicrobials without de-escalation for patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia in a medical ICU: a randomized clinical trial
|
---|---|
Published in |
Critical Care, February 2012
|
DOI | 10.1186/cc11197 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Jong Wook Kim, Joowon Chung, Sang-Ho Choi, Hang Jea Jang, Sang-Bum Hong, Chae-Man Lim, Younsuck Koh |
Abstract |
Although early use of broad-spectrum antimicrobials in critically ill patients may increase antimicrobial adequacy, uncontrolled use of these agents may select for more-resistant organisms. This study investigated the effects of early use of broad-spectrum antimicrobials in critically ill patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 States | 1 | 50% |
Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
France | 1 | <1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | <1% |
Japan | 1 | <1% |
Greece | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 121 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 18% |
Researcher | 20 | 16% |
Other | 14 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 12 | 10% |
Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 9% |
Other | 24 | 19% |
Unknown | 22 | 17% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 63 | 50% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 7% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 7% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
Other | 11 | 9% |
Unknown | 28 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 16 September 2019.
All research outputs
#7,356,343
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,042
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,590
of 258,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#39
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
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 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 258,163 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.