↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Medicare’s Nonpayment for Hospital-Acquired Conditions: Lessons for Future Policy

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Internal Medicine, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
37 X users
facebook
9 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
4 Redditors

Readers on

mendeley
159 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Effect of Medicare’s Nonpayment for Hospital-Acquired Conditions: Lessons for Future Policy
Published in
JAMA Internal Medicine, March 2015
DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.5486
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In 2008, Medicare implemented the Hospital-Acquired Conditions (HACs) Initiative, a policy denying incremental payment for 8 complications of hospital care, also known as never events. The regulation's effect on these events has not been well studied.

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 profiles of 37 X users 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 159 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 %
United States 2 1%
Brazil 2 1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 151 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 16%
Researcher 20 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 12%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Other 12 8%
Other 38 24%
Unknown 31 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 34 21%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 4%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Engineering 4 3%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 41 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 68. 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 29 March 2021.
All research outputs
#787,626
of 33,732,945 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Internal Medicine
#2,223
of 6,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,908
of 294,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Internal Medicine
#52
of 153 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,732,945 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,194 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 156.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 294,541 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 153 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.