↓ Skip to main content

Multicentre validation of the bedside paediatric early warning system score: a severity of illness score to detect evolving critical illness in hospitalised children

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, August 2011
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 (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
3 policy sources
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
177 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
209 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
Multicentre validation of the bedside paediatric early warning system score: a severity of illness score to detect evolving critical illness in hospitalised children
Published in
Critical Care, August 2011
DOI 10.1186/cc10337
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher S Parshuram, Heather P Duncan, Ari R Joffe, Catherine A Farrell, Jacques R Lacroix, Kristen L Middaugh, James S Hutchison, David Wensley, Nadeene Blanchard, Joseph Beyene, Patricia C Parkin

Abstract

The timely provision of critical care to hospitalised patients at risk for cardiopulmonary arrest is contingent upon identification and referral by frontline providers. Current approaches require improvement. In a single-centre study, we developed the Bedside Paediatric Early Warning System (Bedside PEWS) score to identify patients at risk. The objective of this study was to validate the Bedside PEWS score in a large patient population at multiple 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 209 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
Brazil 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 201 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 13%
Other 24 11%
Researcher 24 11%
Student > Postgraduate 19 9%
Student > Bachelor 13 6%
Other 49 23%
Unknown 52 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 102 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Social Sciences 3 1%
Psychology 3 1%
Other 15 7%
Unknown 55 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 06 April 2022.
All research outputs
#3,414,665
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,733
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,756
of 130,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#10
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 130,470 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.