↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Consensus‐based Recommendations for Research Priorities Related to Interventions to Safeguard Patient Safety in the Crowded Emergency Department
Published in
Academic Emergency Medicine, December 2011
DOI 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01234.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher Fee, Kendall Hall, J. Bradley Morrison, Robert Stephens, Karen Cosby, Rollin J. Fairbanks, Barbara Youngberg, Gail Lenehan, Jameel Abualenain, Kevin O’Connor, Robert Wears

Abstract

This article describes the results of the Interventions to Safeguard Safety breakout session of the 2011 Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) consensus conference entitled "Interventions to Assure Quality in the Crowded Emergency Department." Using a multistep nominal group technique, experts in emergency department (ED) crowding, patient safety, and systems engineering defined knowledge gaps and priority research questions related to the maintenance of safety in the crowded ED. Consensus was reached for seven research priorities related to interventions to maintain safety in the setting of a crowded ED. Included among these are: 1) How do routine corrective processes and compensating mechanism change during crowding? 2) What metrics should be used to determine ED safety? 3) How can checklists ensure safer care and what factors contribute to their success or failure? 4) What constitutes safe staffing levels/ratios? 5) How can we align emergency medicine (EM)-specific patient safety issues with national patient safety issues? 6) How can we develop metrics and skills to recognize when an ED is getting close to catastrophic overload conditions? and 7) What can EM learn from experts and modeling from fields outside of medicine to develop innovative solutions? These priorities have the potential to inform future clinical and human factors research and extramural funding decisions related to this important topic.

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 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Italy 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 70 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 19%
Researcher 14 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Other 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 15 20%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 16%
Psychology 6 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 15 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 December 2011.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Academic Emergency Medicine
#3,142
of 3,734 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,783
of 248,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic Emergency Medicine
#37
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 3,734 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.3. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 248,910 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.