↓ Skip to main content

Implementation of infection control best practice in intensive care units throughout Europe: a mixed-method evaluation study

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, February 2013
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 (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
19 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
225 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Implementation of infection control best practice in intensive care units throughout Europe: a mixed-method evaluation study
Published in
Implementation Science, February 2013
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-8-24
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hugo Sax, Lauren Clack, Sylvie Touveneau, Fabricio da Liberdade Jantarada, Didier Pittet, Walter Zingg, PROHIBIT study group

Abstract

The implementation of evidence-based infection control practices is essential, yet challenging for healthcare institutions worldwide. Although acknowledged that implementation success varies with contextual factors, little is known regarding the most critical specific conditions within the complex cultural milieu of varying economic, political, and healthcare systems. Given the increasing reliance on unified global schemes to improve patient safety and healthcare effectiveness, research on this topic is needed and timely. The 'InDepth' work package of the European FP7 Prevention of Hospital Infections by Intervention and Training (PROHIBIT) consortium aims to assess barriers and facilitators to the successful implementation of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) prevention in intensive care units (ICU) across several European countries.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 225 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 218 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 19%
Researcher 26 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 12%
Student > Postgraduate 18 8%
Other 16 7%
Other 48 21%
Unknown 49 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 45 20%
Social Sciences 19 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 9 4%
Psychology 7 3%
Other 38 17%
Unknown 59 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 06 September 2016.
All research outputs
#1,077,479
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#191
of 1,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,099
of 194,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#1
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,728 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 194,709 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 36 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 97% of its contemporaries.