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 |
Refining and testing the diagnostic accuracy of an assessment tool (PAT-POPS) to predict admission and discharge of children and young people who attend an emergency department: protocol for an observational study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pediatrics, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12887-018-1268-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Samah Riaz, Andrew Rowland, Steve Woby, Tony Long, Joan Livesley, Sarah Cotterill, Calvin Heal, Damian Roland |
| Abstract |
Increasing attendances by children (aged 0-16 years) to United Kingdom Emergency Departments (EDs) challenges patient safety within the National Health Service (NHS) with health professionals required to make complex judgements on whether children attending urgent and emergency care services can be sent home safely or require admission. Health regulation bodies have recommended that an early identification systems should be developed to recognise children developing critical illnesses. The Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust Paediatric Observation Priority Score (PAT-POPS) was developed as an ED-specific tool for this purpose. This study aims to revise and improve the existing tool and determine its utility in determining safe admission and discharge decision making. An observational study to improve diagnostic accuracy using data from children and young people attending the ED and Urgent Care Centre (UCC) at three hospitals over a 12 month period. The data being collected is part of routine practice; therefore opt-out methods of consent will be used. The reference standard is admission or discharge. A revised PAT-POPs scoring tool will be developed using clinically guided logistic regression models to explore which components best predict hospital admission and safe discharge. Suitable cut-points for safe admission and discharge will be established using sensitivity and specificity as judged by an expert consensus meeting. The diagnostic accuracy of the revised tool will be assessed, and it will be compared to the former version of PAT-POPS using ROC analysis. This new predictive tool will aid discharge and admission decision-making in relation to children and young people in hospital urgent and emergency care facilities. NIHR RfPB Grant: PB-PG-0815-20034. ClinicalTrials.gov: 213469. Retrospectively registered on 11 April 2018. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 18 | 67% |
| Unknown | 9 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 56% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 30% |
| Scientists | 3 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Researcher | 4 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 32 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 16% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 33 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 08 February 2020.
All research outputs
#1,502,335
of 25,661,882 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#155
of 3,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,207
of 351,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#4
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,661,882 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,495 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 351,880 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.