↓ Skip to main content

The effect of implementing a modified early warning scoring (MEWS) system on the adequacy of vital sign documentation

Overview of attention for article published in Australian critical care : official journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses., May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 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
The effect of implementing a modified early warning scoring (MEWS) system on the adequacy of vital sign documentation
Published in
Australian critical care : official journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses., May 2012
DOI 10.1016/j.aucc.2012.05.001
Pubmed ID
Authors

Naomi E. Hammond, Amy J. Spooner, Adrian G. Barnett, Amanda Corley, Peter Brown, John F. Fraser

Abstract

Early recognition of deteriorating patients results in better patient outcomes. Modified early warning scores (MEWS) attempt to identify deteriorating patients early so timely interventions can occur thus reducing serious adverse events. We compared frequencies of vital sign recording 24h post-ICU discharge and 24h preceding unplanned ICU admission before and after a new observation chart using MEWS and an associated educational programme was implemented into an Australian Tertiary referral hospital in Brisbane.

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 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
United States 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 151 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 20%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Student > Postgraduate 16 10%
Researcher 13 8%
Other 10 6%
Other 30 19%
Unknown 38 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 37 24%
Computer Science 6 4%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Mathematics 2 1%
Other 12 8%
Unknown 43 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 18 May 2021.
All research outputs
#5,165,207
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Australian critical care : official journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses.
#300
of 809 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,804
of 178,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian critical care : official journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses.
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 809 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 178,785 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them