| Title |
New perspectives to improve critical care benchmarking
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Intensive Care, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13613-018-0363-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jorge I. F. Salluh, Jean Daniel Chiche, Carlos Eduardo Reis, Marcio Soares |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 4 | 17% |
| Spain | 3 | 13% |
| United States | 3 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Colombia | 1 | 4% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 4% |
| Uruguay | 1 | 4% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 52% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 22% |
| Scientists | 5 | 22% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 28% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 14 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 17 January 2019.
All research outputs
#2,713,638
of 24,648,202 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#351
of 1,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,781
of 448,956 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#11
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,648,202 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,140 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 69% 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 448,956 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 70% of its contemporaries.