↓ Skip to main content

Comparing hospital mortality – how to count does matter for patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke and hip fracture

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Comparing hospital mortality – how to count does matter for patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke and hip fracture
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, October 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-12-364
Pubmed ID
Authors

Doris T Kristoffersen, Jon Helgeland, Jocelyne Clench-Aas, Petter Laake, Marit B Veierød

Abstract

Mortality is a widely used, but often criticised, quality indicator for hospitals. In many countries, mortality is calculated from in-hospital deaths, due to limited access to follow-up data on patients transferred between hospitals and on discharged patients. The objectives were to: i) summarize time, place and cause of death for first time acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke and hip fracture, ii) compare case-mix adjusted 30-day mortality measures based on in-hospital deaths and in-and-out-of hospital deaths, with and without patients transferred to other hospitals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 46 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Master 6 13%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 17 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 33%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Unspecified 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 19 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 July 2013.
All research outputs
#18,341,711
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#6,439
of 7,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,690
of 182,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#95
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,597 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 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 182,036 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.