↓ Skip to main content

Examining markers of safety in homecare using the international classification for patient safety

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 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
Examining markers of safety in homecare using the international classification for patient safety
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-13-191
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marilyn T Macdonald, Ariella Lang, Janet Storch, Lynn Stevenson, Tanya Barber, Kristine Iaboni, Susan Donaldson

Abstract

Homecare is a growth enterprise. The nature of the care provided in the home is growing in complexity. This growth has necessitated both examination and generation of evidence around patient safety in homecare. The purpose of this paper is to examine the findings of a recent scoping review of the homecare literature 2004-2011 using the World Health Organization International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS), which was developed for use across all care settings, and discuss the utility of the ICPS in the home setting. The scoping review focused on Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and Congestive Heart Failure (CHF); two chronic illnesses commonly managed at home and that represent frequent hospital readmissions. The scoping review identified seven safety markers for homecare: Medication mania; Home alone; A fixed agenda in a foreign language; Strangers in the home; The butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker; Out of pocket: the cost of caring at home; and My health for yours: declining caregiver health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 117 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Researcher 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 23 19%
Unknown 31 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 18%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 3%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 34 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 June 2013.
All research outputs
#14,753,796
of 22,711,242 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,341
of 7,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,628
of 195,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#85
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,593 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 195,245 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.