| Title |
Effects of higher PEEP and recruitment manoeuvres on mortality in patients with ARDS: a systematic review, meta-analysis, meta-regression and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental, December 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40635-020-00322-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lorenzo Ball, Ary Serpa Neto, Valeria Trifiletti, Maura Mandelli, Iacopo Firpo, Chiara Robba, Marcelo Gama de Abreu, Marcus J. Schultz, Nicolò Patroniti, Patricia R. M. Rocco, Paolo Pelosi |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 20% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 20% |
| Italy | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 22 | 47% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 25 | 53% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 09 December 2022.
All research outputs
#7,579,338
of 23,963,877 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
#190
of 478 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,100
of 507,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
#10
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,963,877 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 478 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 507,110 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 60% of its contemporaries.