↓ Skip to main content

Predictors of health-related quality of life after burn injuries: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
75 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
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.
Title
Predictors of health-related quality of life after burn injuries: a systematic review
Published in
Critical Care, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13054-018-2071-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Inge Spronk, Catherine M. Legemate, Jan Dokter, Nancy E. E. van Loey, Margriet E. van Baar, Suzanne Polinder

Abstract

Identifying predictors of health-related quality of life (HRQL) following burns is essential for optimization of rehabilitation for burn survivors. This study aimed to systematically review predictors of HRQL in burn patients. Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, CINAHL, and Google Scholar were reviewed from inception to October 2016 for studies that investigated at least one predictor of HRQL after burns. The Quality in Prognostic Studies tool was used to assess risk of bias of included studies. Thirty-two studies were included. Severity of burns, postburn depression, post-traumatic stress symptoms, avoidance coping, less emotional or social support, higher levels of neuroticism, and unemployment postburn were found to predict a poorer HRQL after burns in multivariable analyses. In addition, weaker predictors included female gender, pain, and a postburn substance use disorder. Risk of bias was generally low in outcome measurement and high in study attrition and study confounding. HRQL after burns is affected by the severity of burns and the psychological response to the trauma. Both constructs provide unique information and knowledge that are necessary for optimized rehabilitation. Therefore, both physical and psychological problems require attention months to years after the burn trauma.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 116 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 10%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 20 17%
Unknown 38 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 22%
Psychology 11 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Unspecified 5 4%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 41 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 06 July 2018.
All research outputs
#4,160,384
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,972
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,926
of 341,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#56
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 341,958 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.