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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Triage systems for pre-hospital emergency medical services - a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1757-7241-21-28 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ingeborg Beate Lidal, Hilde H Holte, Gunn Elisabeth Vist |
| Abstract |
The emergency medical services (EMS) cover initiatives and services established to provide essential medical assistance in situations of acute illness. Triage-methods for systematic prioritizing of patients according to how urgent patients need care, including triage of requests of acute medical treatment, are adopted in hospitals as well as in the pre-hospital settings. This systematic review searched to identify available research on the effects of validated triage systems for use in the pre-hospital EMS on health outcomes, patient safety, patient satisfaction, user-friendliness, resource use, goal achievement, and the quality on the information exchange between the different settings of the EMS (for example the quality of documentation). The specific research questions were: 1) are pre-hospital triage systems effective, 2) is one triage system more effective than others, and 3) is it effective to use the same triage system in two or more settings of the EMS-chain? We conducted a systematic literature search in nine databases up to June 2012. We searched for systematic reviews (SRs), randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized controlled trials (non-RCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series analyses (ITSs). Two persons independently reviewed titles and abstracts, and the same persons read all possibly relevant full text articles and rated the methodological quality where relevant. The literature search identified 11011 unique references. A total of 120 publications were read in full text. None of the identified articles fulfilled our inclusion criteria, thus our question on the effects of pre-hospital triage systems, if one system is better than other systems, and the question on effects of using the same triage system in two or more settings of the EMS, remain unanswered. We conclude that there is an evidence gap regarding the effects of pre-hospital triage systems and the effects of using the same triage system in two or more settings of the EMS. The finding does not mean that pre-hospital triage systems are ineffective, but that we lack knowledge about potential effects. When introducing a new assessment tool in the EMS, it is timely to conduct well-planned studies aimed to assess the effect. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 40% |
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 186 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 30 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 28 | 14% |
| Researcher | 21 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 18 | 9% |
| Other | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 38 | 19% |
| Unknown | 48 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 65 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 40 | 21% |
| Engineering | 7 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 19 | 10% |
| Unknown | 56 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 30 April 2013.
All research outputs
#6,258,258
of 22,707,247 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#539
of 1,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,656
of 197,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#10
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,707,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,254 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 197,213 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 70% of its contemporaries.