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 |
Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist versus pressure support ventilation: a randomized controlled feasibility trial performed in patients at risk of prolonged mechanical ventilation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, May 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-020-02923-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel J. Hadfield, Louise Rose, Fiona Reid, Victoria Cornelius, Nicholas Hart, Clare Finney, Bethany Penhaligon, Jasmine Molai, Clair Harris, Sian Saha, Harriet Noble, Emma Clarey, Leah Thompson, John Smith, Lucy Johnson, Phillip A. Hopkins, Gerrard F. Rafferty |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 57 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 Kingdom | 26 | 46% |
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Italy | 2 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Chile | 1 | 2% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 33 | 58% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 13 | 23% |
| Scientists | 10 | 18% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 86 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 12% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 39 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 41 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. 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 December 2020.
All research outputs
#1,053,406
of 25,804,096 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#809
of 6,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,981
of 422,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#34
of 203 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,804,096 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,623 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 422,441 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 203 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.