| Title |
Efficacy of a Low-Cost Bubble CPAP System in Treatment of Respiratory Distress in a Neonatal Ward in Malawi
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0086327 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kondwani Kawaza, Heather E. Machen, Jocelyn Brown, Zondiwe Mwanza, Suzanne Iniguez, Al Gest, E. O'Brian Smith, Maria Oden, Rebecca R. Richards-Kortum, Elizabeth Molyneux |
| Abstract |
Respiratory failure is a leading cause of neonatal mortality in the developing world. Bubble continuous positive airway pressure (bCPAP) is a safe, effective intervention for infants with respiratory distress and is widely used in developed countries. Because of its high cost, bCPAP is not widely utilized in low-resource settings. We evaluated the performance of a new bCPAP system to treat severe respiratory distress in a low resource setting, comparing it to nasal oxygen therapy, the current standard of care. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 260 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 257 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 37 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 13% |
| Researcher | 31 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 24 | 9% |
| Other | 20 | 8% |
| Other | 53 | 20% |
| Unknown | 61 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 111 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 32 | 12% |
| Engineering | 12 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 24 | 9% |
| Unknown | 63 | 24% |