↓ Skip to main content

Empirical validation of the New Zealand serious non-fatal injury outcome indicator for ‘all injury’

Overview of attention for article published in Injury Prevention, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
4 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.
Article details
Title
Empirical validation of the New Zealand serious non-fatal injury outcome indicator for ‘all injury’
Published in
Injury Prevention, September 2017
DOI 10.1136/injuryprev-2017-042463
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Our purpose was to empirically validate the official New Zealand (NZ) serious non-fatal 'all injury' indicator. To that end, we aimed to investigate the assumption that cases selected by the indicator have a high probability of admission. Using NZ hospital in-patient records, we identified serious injury diagnoses, captured by the indicator, if their diagnosis-specific survival probability was ≤0.941 based on at least 100 admissions. Corresponding diagnosis-specific admission probabilities from regions in Canada, Denmark and Greece were estimated. Aggregate admission probabilities across those injury diagnoses were calculated and inference made to New Zealand. The admission probabilities were 0.82, 0.89 and 0.90 for the regions of Canada, Denmark and Greece, respectively. This work provides evidence that the threshold set for the official New Zealand serious non-fatal injury indicator for 'all injury' captures injuries with high aggregate admission probability. If so, it is valid for monitoring the incidence of serious injuries.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 1 25%
Student > Master 1 25%
Unknown 2 50%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 25%
Unknown 2 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 09 October 2017.
All research outputs
#5,343,233
of 28,832,041 outputs
Outputs from Injury Prevention
#918
of 2,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,794
of 335,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Injury Prevention
#35
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,832,041 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,278 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 335,518 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.