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 |
Distance education in neonatal nursing scenarios: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1590/s0080-623420150000300021 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laís Machado Freire, Mariane Andreza de Paula, Elysangela Dittz Duarte, Mariana Bueno |
| Abstract |
OBJECTIVE Identify resources that support learning mediated by technology in the field of neonatal nursing. METHOD Systematic review with searches conducted in MEDLINE, LILACS and SciELO. Titles and abstracts were independently evaluated by two experts. RESULTS Of the 2,051 references, 203 full-text articles were analyzed, resulting in the inclusion of nine studies on semiotics and semiology, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, general aspects of neonatal care, diagnostic reasoning and assessment of pain. Only two articles addressed the development of educational strategies and seven papers described the assessment of these strategies by experts and/or users. CONCLUSION Distance education is an important resource for education, and its improvement and updating, and it particularly adds advantages for neonatal nursing by approximating teaching and real-life situations and by minimizing the exposure of newborns for teaching purposes. The lack of educational initiatives mediated by technology suggests the need for the development, evaluation and dissemination of educational resources focused on nursing care of newborns and their families. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 64 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 8% |
| Professor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 16 | 25% |
| Unknown | 19 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 23% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 18 | 28% |
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 20 June 2015.
All research outputs
#19,918,696
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP
#543
of 771 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,580
of 281,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 771 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 281,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.