↓ Skip to main content

Retrospective Cohort Comparison of Fall Height in Children in the Greater Los Angeles Area: Targeting Populations for Injury Prevention

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Community Health, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
Title
Retrospective Cohort Comparison of Fall Height in Children in the Greater Los Angeles Area: Targeting Populations for Injury Prevention
Published in
Journal of Community Health, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10900-018-0515-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica A. Zagory, Cory McLaughlin, Michael Mallicote, Helen Arbogast, Jeffrey S. Upperman, Aaron R. Jensen

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine whether falls from significant height occur more frequently in young children. We conducted a 10-year (2004-2014), comparative study using a retrospective cohort of 4713 children (< 18 years) from the Los Angeles county trauma database who were evaluated for a fall. Exposure was fall height, dichotomized into < 10 ft/low-risk fall and > 10 ft/high-risk fall. Primary outcome was age of fall. Secondary outcomes were disposition from emergency department, injuries, resource utilization, and mortality. Of all falls, 4481 (95%) were low-risk and 232 (5%) high-risk. High-risk falls were more frequent in children 1-3 years old (58 vs. 30%, p < 0.01), associated with higher frequency of intracranial hemorrhage (19 vs. 10%, p < 0.01), intubation (11 vs. 1%, p < 0.01), and neurosurgical procedure (2 vs. 0.8%, p = 0.04). There was no difference in mortality (0.86 vs. 0.13%, p = 0.06). In Los Angeles County, children 1-3 years old are most likely to suffer high-risk falls, which are associated with serious injury. Integration of fall prevention education into routine anticipatory guidance should be strongly considered for children 1-3 years old.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Master 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Researcher 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 9 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Computer Science 2 7%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 13 45%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 July 2018.
All research outputs
#6,449,410
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Health
#375
of 1,228 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,904
of 328,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Health
#7
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,228 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 328,950 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.