↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
44 X users

Readers on

mendeley
119 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
What nurses involved in a Medical Emergency Teams consider the most vital areas of knowledge and skill when delivering care to the deteriorating ward patient. A nurse-oriented curriculum development project
Published in
Nurse Education Today, May 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.05.009
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Critical care nurses have been involved in Rapid Response Teams since their inception, particularly in medically led RRTs, known as Medical Emergency Teams. It is assumed that critical care skills are required to escalate care for the deteriorating ward patient. However, evidence to support critical care nurses' involvement in METs is anecdotal. Currently, little is known about the educational requirements for nurses involved in RRT or METs. We aimed to identify and describe what nurses involved in a MET consider the most vital areas of knowledge and skill when delivering care to the deteriorating ward patient. An exploratory descriptive design was used and data was collected at a session of the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Rapid Response Team (ANZICS-RRT) Conference held at The Gold Coast, Australia in July 2015. All conference delegates were eligible to take part. Conference delegates totalled 293; 194 nurses, 89 doctors and 10 allied health professionals. Data collection took place in three phases, over a 90-minute period. First, demographic data were collected from all participants at the start of data collection. These data were collected using paper-based surveys. Second, extended response surveys; that is, paper-based surveys that asked open-ended questions to elicit free text responses, were used to collect participants' individual responses to the question: "What are the specific theoretical knowledge, skills and behavioural attributes required in a curricula to prepare nurses to be high functioning members of a MET?" Demographic, educational and work characteristics were descriptively analysed using SPSS (version 22). Participants perceptions of what knowledge, skills and attributes are required for nurses to recognise and respond to clinical deterioration were thematically analysed. Participants were predominantly female (88.3%, n = 91) with 54.4% (n = 56) holding a Bachelor of Nursing. Participants had a median of 20 years (IQR 16) experience as RNs, and a median of 14 years (IQR 13) experience in critical care. Participants formed part of METs frequently, with nearly half the cohort seeing clinically deteriorating patients more than once per day (37.9%, n = 33) or daily (10%, n = 9). Thematic analysis of survey responses revealed four main themes desired in Rapid Response Team Curricula: Clinical Deterioration Theory, Clinical Deterioration Skills, Rapid Response System Governance, and Professionalism and Teamwork. We suggest that a curriculum that educates nurses on the specific requirements of assessing, managing and evaluating all aspects of clinical deterioration is now required.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 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 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 119 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 16%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Librarian 6 5%
Researcher 6 5%
Other 20 17%
Unknown 47 39%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 40 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Psychology 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 49 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 07 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,621,331
of 31,078,525 outputs
Outputs from Nurse Education Today
#161
of 2,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,087
of 356,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nurse Education Today
#10
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 31,078,525 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,776 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 356,528 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.