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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Physician-led team triage based on lean principles may be superior for efficiency and quality? A comparison of three emergency departments with different triage models
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1757-7241-20-57 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lena Burström, Martin Nordberg, Göran Örnung, Maaret Castrén, Tony Wiklund, Marie-Louise Engström, Mats Enlund |
| Abstract |
The management of emergency departments (EDs) principally involves maintaining effective patient flow and care. Different triage models are used today to achieve these two goals. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of different triage models used in three Swedish EDs. Using efficiency and quality indicators, we compared the following triage models: physician-led team triage, nurse first/emergency physician second, and nurse first/junior physician second. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Norway | 1 | 17% |
| Japan | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Israel | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 132 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 40 | 29% |
| Researcher | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 18% |
| Unknown | 28 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 15% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 14 | 10% |
| Engineering | 8 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 32 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 16 November 2019.
All research outputs
#3,705,199
of 23,607,611 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#354
of 1,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,662
of 247,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#13
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,607,611 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,279 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 247,745 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.