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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
De-implementation of expensive blood saving measures in hip and knee arthroplasties: study protocol for the LISBOA-II cluster randomized trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-9-48 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Veronique MA Voorn, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen, Cynthia So-Osman, Ad A Kaptein, Anja van der Hout, M Elske van den Akker-van Marle, Ankie WMM Koopman-van Gemert, Albert Dahan, Rob GHH Nelissen, Thea PMM Vliet Vlieland, Leti van Bodegom-Vos |
| Abstract |
Despite evidence that erythropoietin and intra- and postoperative blood salvage are expensive techniques considered to be non-cost-effective in primary elective total hip and knee arthroplasties in the Netherlands, Dutch medical professionals use them frequently to prevent the need for allogeneic transfusion. To actually change physicians' practice, a tailored strategy aimed at barriers that hinder physicians in abandoning the use of erythropoietin and perioperative blood salvage was systematically developed. The study aims to examine the effectiveness, feasibility and costs of this tailored de-implementation strategy compared to a control strategy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 101 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 12% |
| Researcher | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 27 | 25% |
| Unknown | 25 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 11% |
| Psychology | 5 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 12 | 11% |
| Unknown | 31 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 April 2014.
All research outputs
#12,898,658
of 22,754,104 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,334
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,370
of 227,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#32
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,754,104 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 227,083 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 52% 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 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.