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 |
Identifying complications of interventional procedures from UK routine healthcare databases: a systematic search for methods using clinical codes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-14-126 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kim Keltie, Helen Cole, Mick Arber, Hannah Patrick, John Powell, Bruce Campbell, Andrew Sims |
| Abstract |
Several authors have developed and applied methods to routine data sets to identify the nature and rate of complications following interventional procedures. But, to date, there has been no systematic search for such methods. The objective of this article was to find, classify and appraise published methods, based on analysis of clinical codes, which used routine healthcare databases in a United Kingdom setting to identify complications resulting from interventional procedures. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 50 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 14% |
| Researcher | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 18 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 20% |
| Engineering | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 24 | 47% |
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 12 December 2014.
All research outputs
#17,733,724
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,674
of 2,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,101
of 361,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#20
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,010 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 361,884 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.