↓ Skip to main content

High flow nasal cannula compared with conventional oxygen therapy for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, March 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
93 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
High flow nasal cannula compared with conventional oxygen therapy for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, March 2019
DOI 10.1007/s00134-019-05590-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

B. Rochwerg, D. Granton, D. X. Wang, Y. Helviz, S. Einav, J. P. Frat, A. Mekontso-Dessap, A. Schreiber, E. Azoulay, A. Mercat, A. Demoule, V. Lemiale, A. Pesenti, E. D. Riviello, T. Mauri, J. Mancebo, L. Brochard, K. Burns

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 93 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 15 27%
Unspecified 8 14%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Other 12 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 54%
Unspecified 12 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 3 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 63. 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 October 2019.
All research outputs
#279,451
of 13,595,880 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#152
of 3,523 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,459
of 252,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#11
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,595,880 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,523 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 252,193 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.