↓ Skip to main content

Nurses’ workarounds in acute healthcare settings: a scoping review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
167 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
370 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
Nurses’ workarounds in acute healthcare settings: a scoping review
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-13-175
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deborah S Debono, David Greenfield, Joanne F Travaglia, Janet C Long, Deborah Black, Julie Johnson, Jeffrey Braithwaite

Abstract

Workarounds circumvent or temporarily 'fix' perceived workflow hindrances to meet a goal or to achieve it more readily. Behaviours fitting the definition of workarounds often include violations, deviations, problem solving, improvisations, procedural failures and shortcuts. Clinicians implement workarounds in response to the complexity of delivering patient care. One imperative to understand workarounds lies in their influence on patient safety. This paper assesses the peer reviewed empirical evidence available on the use, proliferation, conceptualisation, rationalisation and perceived impact of nurses' use of workarounds in acute care settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 370 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 3 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Grenada 1 <1%
Unknown 358 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 89 24%
Student > Bachelor 42 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 34 9%
Researcher 26 7%
Other 75 20%
Unknown 63 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 81 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 75 20%
Engineering 25 7%
Social Sciences 23 6%
Psychology 21 6%
Other 74 20%
Unknown 71 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 10 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,336,403
of 25,139,853 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#406
of 8,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,297
of 198,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#4
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,139,853 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,532 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 198,673 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 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.