| Title |
Medical intensive care unit clinician attitudes and perceived barriers towards early mobilization of critically ill patients: a cross-sectional survey study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Anesthesiology, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2253-14-84 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah E Jolley, Janet Regan-Baggs, Robert P Dickson, Catherine L Hough |
| Abstract |
Early mobilization (EM) of patients on mechanical ventilation (MV) is shown to improve outcomes after critical illness. Little is known regarding clinician knowledge of EM or multi-disciplinary barriers to use of EM in the intensive care unit (ICU). The goal of this study was to assess clinician knowledge regarding EM and identify barriers to its provision. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 44% |
| Australia | 2 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Japan | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 11% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 22% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 230 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 227 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 40 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 11% |
| Researcher | 16 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 46 | 20% |
| Unknown | 74 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 80 | 35% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 46 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Psychology | 4 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 7% |
| Unknown | 75 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 20 January 2016.
All research outputs
#5,971,957
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#198
of 1,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,839
of 253,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#3
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,492 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 253,595 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.