| Title |
Identifying resident care areas for a quality improvement intervention in long-term care: a collaborative approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2318-12-59 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lisa A Cranley, Peter G Norton, Greta G Cummings, Debbie Barnard, Neha Batra-Garga, Carole A Estabrooks |
| Abstract |
In Canada, healthcare aides (also referred to as nurse aides, personal support workers, nursing assistants) are unregulated personnel who provide 70-80% of direct care to residents living in nursing homes. Although they are an integral part of the care team their contributions to the resident care planning process are not always acknowledged in the organization. The purpose of the Safer Care for Older Persons [in residential] Environments (SCOPE) project was to evaluate the feasibility of engaging front line staff (primarily healthcare aides) to use quality improvement methods to integrate best practices into resident care. This paper describes the process used by teams participating in the SCOPE project to select clinical improvement areas. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 2 | 67% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 69 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Professor | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 26% |
| Unknown | 11 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 13% |
| Psychology | 7 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 14% |
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 02 October 2012.
All research outputs
#13,671,297
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#2,031
of 3,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,460
of 171,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#9
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 171,685 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 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.