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 |
Assistance flowchart for pain management in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1590/0034-7167-2017-0265 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Danielle Lemos Querido, Marialda Moreira Christoffel, Viviane Saraiva de Almeida, Ana Paula Vieira dos Santos Esteves, Marilda Andrade, Joffre Amim |
| Abstract |
To describe and discuss the process of developing a flowchart collectively constructed by the health team of a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit for the management of neonatal pain. This is a descriptive and an exploratory study with a qualitative approach that used Problem-Based Learning as a theoretical-methodological framework in the process of developing the assistance flowchart for the management of neonatal pain. Based on this methodology, there was training in service and the discussion of key points of pain management by the health team, which served as input for the construction of the flowchart. The assistance flowchart for pain management, based on scientific evidence, provided means to facilitate the decision-making of the health team regarding the pain of the newborn. It is suggested to use the flowchart frequently to promote the permanent education of the team and identify possible points to be adjusted. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 76 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 39 | 51% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 1% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 42 | 55% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 January 2019.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem
#560
of 738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#389,382
of 449,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem
#47
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 738 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 449,583 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.