| Title |
Positive end-expiratory pressure titration in COVID-19 acute respiratory failure: electrical impedance tomography vs. PEEP/FiO2 tables
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, September 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-020-03242-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicolò Sella, Francesco Zarantonello, Giulio Andreatta, Veronica Gagliardi, Annalisa Boscolo, Paolo Navalesi |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 43 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 | 5 | 12% |
| Spain | 3 | 7% |
| Mexico | 3 | 7% |
| Saudi Arabia | 3 | 7% |
| Italy | 3 | 7% |
| Brazil | 2 | 5% |
| Singapore | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Argentina | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 14 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 34 | 79% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 5% |
| Scientists | 2 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 12 | 20% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 21% |
| Unknown | 14 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 17 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 04 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,639,435
of 25,820,938 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,430
of 6,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,146
of 426,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#36
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,820,938 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,628 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 78% 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 426,827 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 139 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 74% of its contemporaries.