↓ Skip to main content

Infant flow biphasic nasal continuous positive airway pressure (BP- NCPAP) vs. infant flow NCPAP for the facilitation of extubation in infants' ≤ 1,250 grams: a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

Readers on

mendeley
135 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
Infant flow biphasic nasal continuous positive airway pressure (BP- NCPAP) vs. infant flow NCPAP for the facilitation of extubation in infants' ≤ 1,250 grams: a randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, April 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2431-12-43
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karel O'Brien, Craig Campbell, Leanne Brown, Lisa Wenger, Vibhuti Shah

Abstract

The use of mechanical ventilation is associated with lung injury in preterm infants and therefore the goal is to avoid or minimize its use. To date there is very little consensus on what is considered the "best non-invasive ventilation mode" to be used post-extubation. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of biphasic nasal continuous positive airway pressure (BP-NCPAP) vs. NCPAP in facilitating sustained extubation in infants ≤ 1,250 grams.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Argentina 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 133 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 13%
Researcher 15 11%
Other 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Student > Postgraduate 10 7%
Other 29 21%
Unknown 36 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Unspecified 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Psychology 4 3%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 45 33%