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 |
Lacerations and Embedded Needles Caused by Epinephrine Autoinjector Use in Children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Emergency Medicine, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.07.011 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julie C. Brown, Rachel E. Tuuri, Sabreen Akhter, Lilia D. Guerra, Ian S. Goodman, Sage R. Myers, Charles Nozicka, Shannon Manzi, Katharine Long, Troy Turner, Gregory P. Conners, Rachel W. Thompson, Esther Park |
| Abstract |
Epinephrine autoinjector use for anaphylaxis is increasing. There are reports of digit injections because of incorrect autoinjector use, but no previous reports of lacerations, to our knowledge. We report complications of epinephrine autoinjector use in children and discuss features of these devices, and their instructions for use, and how these may contribute to injuries. We queried emergency medicine e-mail discussion lists and social media allergy groups to identify epinephrine autoinjector injuries involving children. Twenty-two cases of epinephrine autoinjector-related injuries are described. Twenty-one occurred during intentional use for the child's allergic reaction. Seventeen children experienced lacerations. In 4 cases, the needle stuck in the child's limb. In 1 case, the device lacerated a nurse's finger. The device associated with the injury was operated by health care providers (6 cases), the patient's parent (12 cases, including 2 nurses), educators (3 cases), and the patient (1 case). Of the 3 epinephrine autoinjectors currently available in North America, none include instructions to immobilize the child's leg. Only 1 has a needle that self-retracts; the others have needles that remain in the thigh during the 10 seconds that the user is instructed to hold the device against the leg. Instructions do not caution against reinjection if the needle is dislodged during these 10 seconds. Epinephrine autoinjectors are lifesaving devices in the management of anaphylaxis. However, some have caused lacerations and other injuries in children. Minimizing needle injection time, improving device design, and providing instructions to immobilize the leg before use may decrease the risk of these injuries. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 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 | 13 | 29% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 13% |
| Canada | 4 | 9% |
| Spain | 3 | 7% |
| Australia | 2 | 4% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 14 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 51% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 12 | 27% |
| Scientists | 7 | 16% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Ireland | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 90 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 17 | 18% |
| Researcher | 14 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 22 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 11% |
| Engineering | 4 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 19% |
| Unknown | 23 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 159. 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 16 January 2024.
All research outputs
#256,786
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Emergency Medicine
#111
of 6,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,464
of 290,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Emergency Medicine
#2
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,822 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 290,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.