↓ Skip to main content

Kangaroo Method: potentialities, barriers and difficulties in humanized care for newborns in the Neonatal ICU.

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem, October 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Kangaroo Method: potentialities, barriers and difficulties in humanized care for newborns in the Neonatal ICU.
Published in
Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem, October 2021
DOI 10.1590/0034-7167-2020-1121
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susian Cássia Liz Luz, Marli Terezinha Stein Backes, Rosiane da Rosa, Eudinéia Luz Schmit, Evangelia Kotzias Atherino Dos Santos

Abstract

To identify the potentialities, barriers and difficulties for the implementation of humanized care from the perspective of the Kangaroo Method. Integrative literature review with a time cut from 02/01/2015 to 06/01/2019, totaling ten articles in the final sample. The findings were categorized into two categories: Potentialities for humanized care from the perspective of the Kangaroo Method; Barriers or difficulties to the implementation of the Kangaroo Method. Several potentialities for humanized care allied to technology and continuing education were identified, as well as several barriers to the implementation of the Kangaroo Method, such as lack of physical space, lack of professionals and team training, lack of knowledge, lack of adherence and professional demotivation. There are still few studies that address the potentialities, barriers and difficulties for the implementation of humanized care from the perspective of the Kangaroo Method, and most of those included in this review were conducted in Brazil and present a qualitative approach.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Other 1 2%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 2%
Researcher 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 32 64%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 7 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Psychology 1 2%
Unknown 32 64%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 16 October 2021.
All research outputs
#8,172,001
of 25,392,582 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem
#97
of 738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,519
of 436,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,392,582 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 738 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 436,541 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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