↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Pediatric Airway Management in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients: Consensus Guidelines From the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia’s Pediatric Difficult Intubation Collaborative and the Canadian…

Overview of attention for article published in Anesthesia and analgesia, April 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#48 of 8,101)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
177 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
132 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
403 Mendeley
Title
Pediatric Airway Management in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients: Consensus Guidelines From the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia’s Pediatric Difficult Intubation Collaborative and the Canadian Pediatric Anesthesia Society
Published in
Anesthesia and analgesia, April 2020
DOI 10.1213/ane.0000000000004872
Pubmed ID
Authors

Clyde T Matava, Pete G Kovatsis, Jennifer K Lee, Pilar Castro, Simon Denning, Julie Yu, Raymond Park, Justin L Lockman, Britta Von Ungern-Sternberg, Stefano Sabato, Lisa K Lee, Ihab Ayad, Sam Mireles, David Lardner, Simon Whyte, Judit Szolnoki, Narasimhan Jagannathan, Nicole Thompson, Mary Lyn Stein, Nicholas Dalesio, Robert Greenberg, John McCloskey, James Peyton, Faye Evans, Bishr Haydar, Paul Reynolds, Franklin Chiao, Brad Taicher, Thomas Templeton, Tarun Bhalla, Vidya T Raman, Annery Garcia-Marcinkiewicz, Jorge Gálvez, Jonathan Tan, Mohamed Rehman, Christy Crockett, Patrick Olomu, Peter Szmuk, Chris Glover, Maria Matuszczak, Ignacio Galvez, Agnes Hunyady, David Polaner, Cheryl Gooden, Grace Hsu, Harshad Gumaney, Caroline Pérez-Pradilla, Edgar E Kiss, Mary C Theroux, Jennifer Lau, Saeedah Asaf, Pablo Ingelmo, Thomas Engelhardt, Mónica Hervías, Eric Greenwood, Luv Javia, Nicola Disma, Myron Yaster, John E Fiadjoe

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 177 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 403 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 403 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 41 10%
Student > Master 39 10%
Other 32 8%
Student > Bachelor 25 6%
Student > Postgraduate 24 6%
Other 104 26%
Unknown 138 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 149 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 27 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 2%
Social Sciences 7 2%
Other 53 13%
Unknown 149 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 126. 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 April 2022.
All research outputs
#333,333
of 25,571,620 outputs
Outputs from Anesthesia and analgesia
#48
of 8,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,444
of 402,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Anesthesia and analgesia
#5
of 221 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,571,620 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,101 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 402,902 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 221 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.