↓ Skip to main content

Abnormal vital signs are strong predictors for intensive care unit admission and in-hospital mortality in adults triaged in the emergency department - a prospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
140 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
243 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
Abnormal vital signs are strong predictors for intensive care unit admission and in-hospital mortality in adults triaged in the emergency department - a prospective cohort study
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, April 2012
DOI 10.1186/1757-7241-20-28
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charlotte Barfod, Marlene Mauson Pankoke Lauritzen, Jakob Klim Danker, György Sölétormos, Jakob Lundager Forberg, Peter Anthony Berlac, Freddy Lippert, Lars Hyldborg Lundstrøm, Kristian Antonsen, Kai Henrik Wiborg Lange

Abstract

Assessment and treatment of the acutely ill patient have improved by introducing systematic assessment and accelerated protocols for specific patient groups. Triage systems are widely used, but few studies have investigated the ability of the triage systems in predicting outcome in the unselected acute population. The aim of this study was to quantify the association between the main component of the Hillerød Acute Process Triage (HAPT) system and the outcome measures; Admission to Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and in-hospital mortality, and to identify the vital signs, scored and categorized at admission, that are most strongly associated with the outcome measures.

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 243 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 238 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 12%
Student > Bachelor 30 12%
Researcher 29 12%
Other 21 9%
Other 41 17%
Unknown 59 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 107 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 14%
Computer Science 11 5%
Engineering 11 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Other 10 4%
Unknown 64 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 June 2019.
All research outputs
#7,356,550
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#652
of 1,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,904
of 174,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#5
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 1,366 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 174,010 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.