| Title |
San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict short-term serious outcomes: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Canadian Medical Association Journal, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1503/cmaj.101326 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ramon T Saccilotto, Christian H Nickel, Heiner C Bucher, Ewout W Steyerberg, Roland Bingisser, Michael T Koller |
| Abstract |
The San Francisco Syncope Rule has been proposed as a clinical decision rule for risk stratification of patients presenting to the emergency department with syncope. It has been validated across various populations and settings. We undertook a systematic review of its accuracy in predicting short-term serious outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 40% |
| Jersey | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Lebanon | 1 | 1% |
| Sweden | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 92 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 15 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 10% |
| Researcher | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 24 | 25% |
| Unknown | 23 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 58 | 60% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 24 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 23 September 2019.
All research outputs
#1,581,258
of 25,389,116 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#1,967
of 9,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,175
of 140,480 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#19
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,389,116 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,427 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 140,480 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.