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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Improved Results in Paediatric Diabetes Care Using a Quality Registry in an Improvement Collaborative: A Case Study in Sweden
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0097875 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anette Peterson, Lena Hanberger, Karin Åkesson, Mats Bojestig, Boel Andersson Gäre, Ulf Samuelsson |
| Abstract |
Several studies show that good metabolic control is important for children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. In Sweden, there are large differences in mean haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in different hospitals and difficulties implementing national guidelines in everyday practice. This study shows how the participation in an improvement collaborative could facilitate improvements in the quality of care by paediatric diabetes teams. The Swedish paediatric diabetes quality registry, SWEDIABKIDS was used as a tool and resource for feedback and outcome measures. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 78 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 13% |
| Researcher | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 11% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 19 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 10% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 23 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 12 July 2018.
All research outputs
#4,798,770
of 25,292,646 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#81,138
of 219,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,439
of 233,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,080
of 4,518 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,292,646 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 219,487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 233,378 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,518 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.