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 |
Public access defibrillation: improving accessibility and outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Medical Bulletin, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1093/bmb/ldw011 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Renhao Desmond Mao, Marcus Eng Hock Ong |
| Abstract |
Worldwide, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains a serious problem. Public access defibrillation (PAD) has been shown to be effective in improving survival in OHCA with good neurological outcome. Original articles, reviews and national/international guidelines. Limitations to how much we can improve ambulance response times mean that the public have an essential role to play in OHCA survival. Training of laypersons in the use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) has been shown to improve outcomes. Placement of AEDs should be related to underlying population demographics. Placements of AEDs face cost constraints. PAD programs also face challenges in the upkeep of AEDs. Concerns about legal liability for lay rescuers to act remain. Systematic programs should be in place to train the public in PAD. All AEDs should be listed in national registries and available for usage in an emergency. 'Smart' technology is being developed to improve accessibility of AEDs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 98 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 12% |
| Researcher | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 17% |
| Unknown | 36 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 14% |
| Engineering | 5 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 13% |
| Unknown | 41 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 January 2023.
All research outputs
#14,720,444
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from British Medical Bulletin
#910
of 1,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,765
of 302,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Medical Bulletin
#9
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,069 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 302,710 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.