↓ Skip to main content

Disaster and dialysis: The Asia‐Pacific

Overview of attention for article published in Nephrology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
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.
Title
Disaster and dialysis: The Asia‐Pacific
Published in
Nephrology, October 2015
DOI 10.1111/nep.12522
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicholas A Gray, Martin Wolley, Adrian Liew, Masaaki Nakayama

Abstract

The impact of natural disasters on the provision of dialysis services has received increased attention in the last decade following Hurricane Katrina devastating New Orleans in 2005. The Asia-Pacific is particularly vulnerable to earthquakes, tsunami, typhoons (also known as cyclones and hurricanes) or storms, and flooding. These events can seriously interrupt provision of haemodialysis with adverse effects for patients including missed dialysis, increased hospitalisation, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Furthermore, haemodialysis patients may need to relocate and experience prolonged periods of displacement from family and social supports. In contrast to haemodialysis, most literature suggests peritoneal dialysis in a disaster situation is more easily managed and supported. It has become apparent that dialysis units and patients should be prepared for a disaster event, and that appropriate planning will result in reduced confusion and adverse outcomes should a disaster occur. Numerous resources are now available to guide dialysis units, patients and staff in preparation for a possible disaster. This article will examine the disaster experiences of dialysis units in the Asia-Pacific, the impact on patients and staff, methods employed to manage during the disaster, and suggested plans for reducing the impact of future disasters.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Researcher 8 11%
Other 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 25 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 15 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 19%
Psychology 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 28 38%
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 07 November 2015.
All research outputs
#21,938,746
of 24,477,448 outputs
Outputs from Nephrology
#866
of 994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#247,600
of 289,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nephrology
#7
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,477,448 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 994 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. 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 289,999 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 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.