↓ Skip to main content

Sudden Cardiac Death of the Young in Michigan: Development and Implementation of a Novel Mortality Review System

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Community Health, April 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
Sudden Cardiac Death of the Young in Michigan: Development and Implementation of a Novel Mortality Review System
Published in
Journal of Community Health, April 2010
DOI 10.1007/s10900-010-9273-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Siddharth Mukerji, Beth Hanna, Debra Duquette, Janice Bach, Kenneth Rosenman

Abstract

Advances in screening, detection and treatment make Sudden Cardiac Death of the Young (SCDY) a potentially preventable condition. Since hereditary causes account for many deaths, identification of an affected individual has implications for immediate relatives; who should receive targeted screening with the aim of preventing SCDY. To develop a mortality review process for SCDY and to identify potential unmet needs for family-based, medical system and public health interventions. The Michigan Department of Community Health and Michigan State University developed a system for investigating SCDY. Review of medical records and next-of-kin (NOK) interviews were conducted. A de-identified summary of each case was presented to an expert panel. The panel identified factors that contributed to the death and possible actions to prevent future deaths. If the case was deemed to have a likely heritable cause, NOK were notified of a possible increased risk and need for evaluation of immediate family members. Twenty-three deaths aged 1-39 years between 2006 and 2008, were selected for review. Sixteen NOK were interviewed. Several primary and secondary prevention measures were identified, including enhanced pre-participation sports screening; provider education; public awareness of risk factors, symptoms, emergency response training for coaches and the general public; and creation and dissemination of emergency response and medical examiner protocols. Seventeen NOK were notified of the potential heritable cause. Investigation of these deaths has led to identification of individual, family, public and provider needs and motivated policy makers to initiate changes to prevent future SCDY.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 52 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 19%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Librarian 3 6%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 9 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 15%
Sports and Recreations 7 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Psychology 6 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 13 25%
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 19 October 2014.
All research outputs
#20,239,689
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Health
#1,097
of 1,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,986
of 95,488 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Health
#9
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 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 1,211 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. 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 95,488 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 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.