↓ Skip to main content

Best strategies to implement clinical pathways in an emergency department setting: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Readers on

mendeley
207 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
Best strategies to implement clinical pathways in an emergency department setting: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial
Published in
Implementation Science, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-8-55
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mona Jabbour, Janet Curran, Shannon D Scott, Astrid Guttman, Thomas Rotter, Francine M Ducharme, M Diane Lougheed, M Louise McNaughton-Filion, Amanda Newton, Mark Shafir, Alison Paprica, Terry Klassen, Monica Taljaard, Jeremy Grimshaw, David W Johnson

Abstract

The clinical pathway is a tool that operationalizes best evidence recommendations and clinical practice guidelines in an accessible format for 'point of care' management by multidisciplinary health teams in hospital settings. While high-quality, expert-developed clinical pathways have many potential benefits, their impact has been limited by variable implementation strategies and suboptimal research designs. Best strategies for implementing pathways into hospital settings remain unknown. This study will seek to develop and comprehensively evaluate best strategies for effective local implementation of externally developed expert clinical pathways.

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 207 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 200 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 19%
Researcher 22 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 10%
Other 16 8%
Student > Postgraduate 14 7%
Other 42 20%
Unknown 53 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 72 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 32 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 3%
Psychology 6 3%
Social Sciences 5 2%
Other 25 12%
Unknown 61 29%
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 03 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,017,633
of 22,711,242 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,037
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,525
of 195,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#24
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 195,606 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 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.