↓ Skip to main content

Complexity of management and health outcomes in a prospective cohort study of 573 heart failure patients in Australia: does more equal less?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Nursing, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Complexity of management and health outcomes in a prospective cohort study of 573 heart failure patients in Australia: does more equal less?
Published in
Journal of Clinical Nursing, February 2013
DOI 10.1111/jocn.12073
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Driscoll, Andrew Tonkin, Andrew Stewart, Linda Worrall‐Carter, David R Thompson, Barbara Riegel, David L Hare, Patricia M Davidson, Christine Mulvany, Simon Stewart

Abstract

To compare the efficacy of chronic heart failure management programmes (CHF-MPs) according to a scoring algorithm used to quantify the level of applied interventions-the Heart Failure Intervention Score (HF-IS).

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Portugal 1 3%
Unknown 34 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 7 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 19%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Librarian 3 8%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Computer Science 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 6 17%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 February 2013.
All research outputs
#22,146,549
of 24,712,008 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Nursing
#5,019
of 5,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#260,769
of 293,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Nursing
#67
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,712,008 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,503 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 293,520 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.