Bleeding Management Practices of Australian Cardiac Surgeons, Anesthesiologists and Perfusionists: A Cross-Sectional National Survey Incorporating the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and COM-B…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, January 2020

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 (78th percentile)
High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy: 1 policy source
twitter: 2 X users

facebook: 1 Facebook page
guideline: 1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley: 50 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	Bleeding Management Practices of Australian Cardiac Surgeons, Anesthesiologists and Perfusionists: A Cross-Sectional National Survey Incorporating the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and COM-B Model
Published in	Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, January 2020
DOI	10.2147/jmdh.s232888
Pubmed ID	32021232
Authors	Bronwyn L Pearse, Samantha Keogh, Claire M Rickard, Daniel J Faulke, Ian Smith, Douglas Wall, Charles McDonald, Yoke L Fung

View on publisher site Alert me about new mentions

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

Timeline

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country	Count	As %
Australia	2	100%

Demographic breakdown

Type
Type	Count	As %
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals)	1	50%
Members of the public	1	50%

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country	Count	As %
Unknown	50	100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status	Count	As %
Student > Bachelor	7	14%
Student > Ph. D. Student	7	14%
Unspecified	5	10%
Other	5	10%
Student > Master	3	6%
Other	6	12%
Unknown	17	34%

Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline	Count	As %
Medicine and Dentistry	8	16%
Nursing and Health Professions	6	12%
Unspecified	5	10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science	3	6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology	2	4%
Other	10	20%
Unknown	16	32%

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 31 December 2024.

All research outputs

#5,631,965

of 29,868,835 outputs

Outputs from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare

#245

of 1,201 outputs

Outputs of similar age

#105,343

of 490,776 outputs

Outputs of similar age from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare

of 17 outputs

Altmetric has tracked 29,868,835 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.

So far Altmetric has tracked 1,201 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 490,776 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 78% of its contemporaries.

We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.