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 |
Economics of open tibial fractures: the pivotal role of length-of-stay and infection
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Economics Review, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13561-017-0168-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Harm Hoekstra, Bart Smeets, Willem-Jan Metsemakers, Anne-Cécile Spitz, Stefaan Nijs |
| Abstract |
In order to define strategies to curb the continuing increase in healthcare costs, we describe the cost breakdown of open tibial fractures. Twenty-seven clinical and process variables were recorded retrospectively, and five main hospital related cost categories were defined. Three multivariate linear models were fitted to the data. Total healthcare costs of open tibial fractures were almost twice as high compared to closed fractures and mainly existed of hospitalization costs. Length-of-stay (LOS) was found to be the most important variable driving the healthcare costs of open tibial fractures. Deep infection lead to a 6-fold increase of LOS and 5-fold increase in total healthcare costs of open tibial fractures. Therefore, appropriate international consensus guidelines are required to improve not only the patient outcome (infection prevention) but also reduce overall healthcare cost by focusing on reducing the LOS. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 15% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 14 | 19% |
| Unknown | 15 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 50% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 20 | 28% |
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 03 October 2017.
All research outputs
#14,365,413
of 23,003,906 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#221
of 435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,796
of 320,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,003,906 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 320,342 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.