| Title |
Interventions for reducing wrong-site surgery and invasive procedures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009404.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mahar, Patrick, Wasiak, Jason, Batty, Lachlan, Fowler, Steven, Cleland, Heather, Gruen, Russell L |
| Abstract |
Specific clinical interventions are needed to reduce wrong-site surgery, which is a rare but potentially disastrous clinical error. Risk factors contributing to wrong-site surgery are variable and complex. The introduction of organisational and professional clinical strategies may have a role in minimising wrong-site surgery. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 105 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 15% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 21 | 20% |
| Unknown | 16 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 25% |
| Psychology | 20 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 13% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 12% |
| Unknown | 23 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 November 2012.
All research outputs
#12,860,342
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,822
of 12,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,435
of 168,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#170
of 226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 168,582 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 226 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.