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 |
Reliability of Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) in Saudi Arabia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Emergency Medicine, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12245-015-0080-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mustafa Alquraini, Emad Awad, Ra’ed Hijazi |
| Abstract |
The Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) is an integral part of the Canadian emergency medicine triaging system. There is growing interest and implementation of CTAS worldwide. However, little is known about its reliability outside Canada. The aim of this study was to determine the reliability agreement of CTAS in a tertiary care emergency center in Saudi Arabia. Ten triage nurses (five senior and five junior nurses) utilized CTAS guidelines to independently assign a triage level for 160 real case-based scenarios. Quadratic weighted kappa statistics were used to measure raters' agreements. Raters provided 1600 triage category assignments to case scenarios for analysis. Intra-rater agreement was similar for both senior and junior nurses; for senior nurses (SN1) kappa 0.871 95 % CI (0.840-0.897), and for junior nurses (SN2) kappa 0.871 95 % CI (0.839-0.898). Inter-rater agreement for the SN1 versus SN2 nurses had statistically meaningful agreement across different triage levels (weighted kappa = 0.770) 95 % CI (0.742-0.797). CTAS has good reliability among emergency department (ED) triage nurses in King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC), Saudi Arabia. The findings suggest that CTAS might be a reliable instrument when applied in countries outside Canada. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Puerto Rico | 2 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| South Africa | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Arab Emirates | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 75 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 12% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 28 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 20% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 1% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 1% |
| Psychology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 30 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 31 August 2015.
All research outputs
#7,778,071
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#254
of 654 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,320
of 275,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#9
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 654 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 275,827 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.