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 |
Assessing basic life support skills without an instructor: is it possible?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6920-12-58 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicolas Mpotos, Bram De Wever, Martin A Valcke, Koenraad G Monsieurs |
| Abstract |
Current methods to assess Basic Life Support skills (BLS; chest compressions and ventilations) require the presence of an instructor. This is time-consuming and comports instructor bias. Since BLS skills testing is a routine activity, it is potentially suitable for automation. We developed a fully automated BLS testing station without instructor by using innovative software linked to a training manikin. The goal of our study was to investigate the feasibility of adequate testing (effectiveness) within the shortest period of time (efficiency). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 80 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 16% |
| Researcher | 13 | 15% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 25 | 29% |
| Unknown | 14 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 34% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 8% |
| Engineering | 5 | 6% |
| Psychology | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 20 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 July 2012.
All research outputs
#14,147,730
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,946
of 3,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,932
of 164,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#23
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,294 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 164,297 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.