| Title |
Use of powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) by healthcare workers for preventing highly infectious viral diseases—a systematic review of evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, August 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-020-01431-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ana Licina, Andrew Silvers, Rhonda L. Stuart |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 | 2 | 15% |
| Japan | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 77% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 85% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 180 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 180 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 12% |
| Other | 17 | 9% |
| Researcher | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 27 | 15% |
| Unknown | 66 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 48 | 27% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 3% |
| Engineering | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 25 | 14% |
| Unknown | 70 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 06 July 2021.
All research outputs
#2,554,033
of 25,295,968 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#430
of 2,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,273
of 405,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#14
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,295,968 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,217 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 405,912 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.