| Title |
Efficacy and safety of neuromuscular electrical stimulation in the prevention of pressure injuries in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Intensive Care, June 2022
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13613-022-01029-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Miriam Viviane Baron, Paulo Eugênio Silva, Janine Koepp, Janete de Souza Urbanetto, Andres Felipe Mantilla Santamaria, Michele Paula dos Santos, Marcus Vinicius de Mello Pinto, Cristine Brandenburg, Isabel Cristina Reinheimer, Sonia Carvalho, Mário Bernardes Wagner, Thomas Miliou, Carlos Eduardo Poli-de-Figueiredo, Bartira Ercília Pinheiro da Costa |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 | 3 | 15% |
| Italy | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Hungary | 1 | 5% |
| France | 1 | 5% |
| Argentina | 1 | 5% |
| Guatemala | 1 | 5% |
| Japan | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 10% |
| Scientists | 2 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 30 | 60% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 14% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 33 | 66% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 02 October 2022.
All research outputs
#3,365,961
of 24,547,718 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#420
of 1,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,127
of 432,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#18
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,547,718 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,127 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 432,794 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.