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 |
Preventable mortality evaluation in the ICU
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, April 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc11212 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
L Marjon Dijkema, Willem Dieperink, Matijs van Meurs, Jan G Zijlstra |
| Abstract |
Mortality is the most widely measured outcome parameter. Improvement of this outcome parameter in critical care is nowadays expected not to come from new technologies or treatment, but from delivering the right care at the right moment in a safe way. The measurement of mortality as an outcome parameter confronts us with a problem in providing follow-up to the results. Especially when proven structure and process interventions are applied already, the cause of a suboptimal performance cannot be deduced easily. One possibility is to evaluate the causes of death and to judge preventability. In this article we explore the opportunities and difficulties of a tool to evaluate preventable mortality in the ICU. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 46 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 15% |
| Professor | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 10 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 60% |
| Engineering | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 April 2012.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#5,970
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,001
of 175,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#99
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 175,005 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.