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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Point prevalence of surgical checklist use in Europe: relationship with hospital mortality
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BJA: The British Journal of Anaesthesia, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1093/bja/aeu460 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
I. Jammer, T. Ahmad, C. Aldecoa, D. Koulenti, T. Goranović, I. Grigoras, B. Mazul-Sunko, R. Matos, R. Moreno, G.H. Sigurdsson, P. Toft, B. Walder, A. Rhodes, R.M. Pearse, for the European Surgical Outcomes Study group |
| Abstract |
The prevalence of use of the World Health Organization surgical checklist is unknown. The clinical effectiveness of this intervention in improving postoperative outcomes is debated. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 Kingdom | 6 | 40% |
| Spain | 1 | 7% |
| Colombia | 1 | 7% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 7% |
| Norway | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 53% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 27% |
| Scientists | 3 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 90 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 12% |
| Researcher | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 20% |
| Unknown | 28 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 16% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 3% |
| Psychology | 3 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 34 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 27 April 2015.
All research outputs
#3,695,408
of 25,782,917 outputs
Outputs from BJA: The British Journal of Anaesthesia
#1,640
of 6,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,328
of 362,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BJA: The British Journal of Anaesthesia
#10
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,782,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,765 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 362,692 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 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.