↓ Skip to main content

Association between inhaled nitric oxide treatment and long-term pulmonary function in survivors of acute respiratory distress syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 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
Association between inhaled nitric oxide treatment and long-term pulmonary function in survivors of acute respiratory distress syndrome
Published in
Critical Care, March 2012
DOI 10.1186/cc11215
Pubmed ID
Authors

R Phillip Dellinger, Stephen W Trzeciak, Gerard J Criner, Janice L Zimmerman, Robert W Taylor, Helen Usansky, Joseph Young, Brahm Goldstein

Abstract

Assessment of treatments for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has focused on short-term outcomes (for example, mortality); little information exists regarding long-term effects of ARDS treatment. Survivors of ARDS episodes may have long-term obstructive/restrictive pulmonary abnormalities and pulmonary gas exchange impairment. A 2004 prospective randomized placebo-controlled trial assessed the efficacy and safety of inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) in patients with non-septic ARDS; the primary endpoint was days alive and off assisted breathing. This analysis examined potential effects of iNO or placebo on pulmonary function six months post-treatment in ARDS survivors from that original study.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 2%
Greece 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 80 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 14%
Student > Master 10 12%
Other 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 25 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 51%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Chemistry 2 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 1%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 27 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 21 March 2012.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#5,467
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,543
of 168,383 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#67
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 168,383 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.