↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of Dysphagics and Nondysphagics on Pulse Oximetry during Oral Feeding

Overview of attention for article published in Dysphagia (0179051X), April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of Dysphagics and Nondysphagics on Pulse Oximetry during Oral Feeding
Published in
Dysphagia (0179051X), April 2014
DOI 10.1007/s004550010003
Authors

Nancy Colodny

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 28 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 34%
Student > Postgraduate 4 14%
Other 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 38%
Linguistics 4 14%
Unspecified 4 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 10%
Social Sciences 3 10%
Other 4 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 January 2010.
All research outputs
#2,155,328
of 8,398,082 outputs
Outputs from Dysphagia (0179051X)
#144
of 428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,871
of 92,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dysphagia (0179051X)
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,398,082 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 60th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 428 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 92,277 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.