↓ Skip to main content

Increasing the frequency of hand washing by healthcare workers does not lead to commensurate reductions in staphylococcal infection in a hospital ward

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
3 patents
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Increasing the frequency of hand washing by healthcare workers does not lead to commensurate reductions in staphylococcal infection in a hospital ward
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2008
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-8-114
Pubmed ID
Authors

Clive B Beggs, Simon J Shepherd, Kevin G Kerr

Abstract

Hand hygiene is generally considered to be the most important measure that can be applied to prevent the spread of healthcare-associated infection (HAI). Continuous emphasis on this intervention has lead to the widespread opinion that HAI rates can be greatly reduced by increased hand hygiene compliance alone. However, this assumes that the effectiveness of hand hygiene is not constrained by other factors and that improved compliance in excess of a given level, in itself, will result in a commensurate reduction in the incidence of HAI. However, several researchers have found the law of diminishing returns to apply to hand hygiene, with the greatest benefits occurring in the first 20% or so of compliance, and others have demonstrated that poor cohorting of nursing staff profoundly influences the effectiveness of hand hygiene measures. Collectively, these findings raise intriguing questions about the extent to which increasing compliance alone can further reduce rates of HAI.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 5%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 79 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 16%
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Other 6 7%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 15 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 46%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Engineering 4 5%
Environmental Science 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 18 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 14 June 2022.
All research outputs
#3,097,915
of 22,663,969 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,004
of 7,636 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,792
of 85,061 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#5
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,969 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,636 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 85,061 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.