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 |
Disparities in the regional, hospital and individual levels of antibiotic use in gallstone surgery in Sweden
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Surgery, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12893-017-0312-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gona Jaafar, Bahman Darkahi, Lars Lindhagen, Gunnar Persson, Gabriel Sandblom |
| Abstract |
Antimicrobial resistance may be promoted by divergent routines and lack of conformity in antibiotic treatment, especially regarding the practice of antibiotic prophylaxis. The aim of the present study was to assess differences in gallstone surgery regarding antibiotic use in Sweden. The study was based on data from the Swedish Register for Gallstone Surgery and ERCP (GallRiks) 2005-2015. Funnel plots were used to test impact of grouping factors, including, hospital and surgeon and to identify units that deviated from the rest of the population. After adjusting for cofounders including age, gender, ASA classification, indication for surgery, operation time, gallbladder perforation and emergency status, there were 0/21 (0%) at the regional level, 18/76 (24%) at the hospital level and 128/1038 (12%) at the surgeon level outside the 99.9% confidence interval (CI). The estimated median odds ratios were 1.13 (95% CI 1.00-1.31) at the regional level, 1.93 (95% CI 1.70-2.19) at the hospital level and 2.38 (95% CI 2.26-2.50) at the surgeon level. There are significant differences between hospitals and surgeons, but little or no differences between regions. These deviations confirm the lack of standardization in regards to prescription of antibiotic prophylaxis and the need more uniform routines regarding antibiotic usage. Randomized controlled trials and large population-based studies are necessary to assess assessing the effectiveness and safety of antibiotic prophylaxis in gallstone surgery. |
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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 21% |
| Unknown | 12 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 32% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 13 | 34% |
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 07 December 2017.
All research outputs
#20,454,971
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from BMC Surgery
#894
of 1,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#375,085
of 439,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Surgery
#7
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,334 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 439,982 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.