| Title |
Impact of sweep gas flow on extracorporeal CO2 removal (ECCO2R)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental, March 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40635-019-0244-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephan Strassmann, Michaela Merten, Simone Schäfer, Jonas de Moll, Daniel Brodie, Anders Larsson, Wolfram Windisch, Christian Karagiannidis |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 8 | 25% |
| Italy | 3 | 9% |
| Qatar | 2 | 6% |
| United States | 2 | 6% |
| Argentina | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| South Africa | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 22 | 69% |
| Scientists | 5 | 16% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 19% |
| Unknown | 5 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 47% |
| Engineering | 4 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 9 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 August 2019.
All research outputs
#1,883,147
of 24,246,771 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
#51
of 493 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,933
of 355,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,246,771 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 493 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 355,286 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.