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 |
High flow nasal therapy versus noninvasive ventilation as initial ventilatory strategy in COPD exacerbation: a multicenter non-inferiority randomized trial
|
---|---|
Published in |
Critical Care, December 2020
|
DOI | 10.1186/s13054-020-03409-0 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Andrea Cortegiani, Federico Longhini, Fabiana Madotto, Paolo Groff, Raffaele Scala, Claudia Crimi, Annalisa Carlucci, Andrea Bruni, Eugenio Garofalo, Santi Maurizio Raineri, Roberto Tonelli, Vittoria Comellini, Enrico Lupia, Luigi Vetrugno, Enrico Clini, Antonino Giarratano, Stefano Nava, Paolo Navalesi, Cesare Gregoretti |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 40 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Italy | 4 | 10% |
United Kingdom | 4 | 10% |
France | 3 | 8% |
Mexico | 2 | 5% |
Peru | 1 | 3% |
Malaysia | 1 | 3% |
Australia | 1 | 3% |
Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
Brazil | 1 | 3% |
Other | 2 | 5% |
Unknown | 20 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 29 | 73% |
Scientists | 6 | 15% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 10% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 120 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 14 | 12% |
Researcher | 13 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 13 | 11% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 7% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
Other | 19 | 16% |
Unknown | 47 | 39% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 32% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 13% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
Unspecified | 2 | 2% |
Engineering | 2 | 2% |
Other | 6 | 5% |
Unknown | 55 | 46% |
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 15 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,601,406
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,412
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,697
of 517,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#42
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 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 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. 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 517,526 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 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 63% of its contemporaries.