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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Is the Readmission Rate a Valid Quality Indicator? A Review of the Evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0112282 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Claudia Fischer, Hester F. Lingsma, Perla J. Marang-van de Mheen, Dionne S. Kringos, Niek S. Klazinga, Ewout W. Steyerberg |
| Abstract |
Hospital readmission rates are increasingly used for both quality improvement and cost control. However, the validity of readmission rates as a measure of quality of hospital care is not evident. We aimed to give an overview of the different methodological aspects in the definition and measurement of readmission rates that need to be considered when interpreting readmission rates as a reflection of quality of care. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 5 | 63% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 296 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 290 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 56 | 19% |
| Researcher | 29 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 29 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 9% |
| Other | 26 | 9% |
| Other | 61 | 21% |
| Unknown | 68 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 97 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 35 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 12 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 38 | 13% |
| Unknown | 91 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 12 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,731,742
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#21,169
of 224,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,803
of 277,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#487
of 5,146 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 277,332 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,146 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.