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 |
Detection of fever in children emergency care: comparisons of tactile and rectal temperatures in Nigerian children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, April 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-0500-3-108 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Felix O Akinbami, Adebola E Orimadegun, Olukemi O Tongo, Olubukola O Okafor, Olusegun O Akinyinka |
| Abstract |
Clinical thermometry is the objective method for temperature measurements but tactile assessment of fever at home is usually the basis for seeking medical attention especially where the cost and level of literacy preclude the use of thermometers. This study was carried out to determine the reliability of tactile perception of fever by caregivers, nurses and house physicians in comparison to rectal thermometry and also the use of commonly practiced surface of the hand in the care of ill children. All caregivers of children aged 6 to 59 months who presented to the emergency department were approached consecutively at the triage stage but 182 children participated. Each child had tactile assessment of fever using palmar and dorsal surfaces of the hand by the caregivers, House Physicians and Nursing Officers. Rectal temperature was also measured and read independently by nurses and house physicians. Comparisons were made between tactile assessments and thermometer readings using a cut-off for fever, 38.0 degrees C and above. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 25% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 46% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Engineering | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 8% |
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 27 June 2014.
All research outputs
#18,373,874
of 22,757,541 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#3,014
of 4,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,713
of 95,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#17
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,541 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 4,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 95,049 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.