↓ Skip to main content

Clinical review: The role of the intensivist and the rapid response team in nosocomial end-of-life care

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 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
Clinical review: The role of the intensivist and the rapid response team in nosocomial end-of-life care
Published in
Critical Care, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc11856
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew K Hilton, Daryl Jones, Rinaldo Bellomo

Abstract

In-hospital end-of-life care outside the ICU is a new and increasing aspect of practice for intensive care physicians in countries where rapid response teams have been introduced. As more of these patients die from withdrawal or withholding of artificial life support, determining whether a patient is dying or not has become as important to intensivists as the management of organ support therapy itself. Intensivists have now moved to making such decisions in hospital wards outside the boundaries of their usual closely monitored environment. This strategic change may cause concern to some intensivists; however, as custodians of the highest technology area in the hospital, intensivists are by necessity involved in such processes. Now, more than ever before, intensive care clinicians must consider the usefulness of key concepts surrounding nosocomial death and dying and the importance and value of making a formal diagnosis of dying in the wards. In this article, we assess the conceptual background, reference points, challenges and implications of these emerging aspects of intensive care medicine.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 91 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 16 17%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Student > Master 8 9%
Other 29 31%
Unknown 12 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 16%
Psychology 4 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 14 15%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 July 2015.
All research outputs
#6,876,021
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,846
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,691
of 206,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#58
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 206,040 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 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 63% of its contemporaries.