↓ Skip to main content

Using simulation for disaster preparedness

Overview of attention for article published in Surgery, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
132 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
Using simulation for disaster preparedness
Published in
Surgery, May 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.surg.2016.03.027
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

As it addresses both technical and nontechnical skills, simulation-based training is playing an increasingly important role in surgery. In addition to the focus on skill acquisition, it is also important to ensure that surgeons are able to perform a variety of tasks in unique and challenging situations. These situations include responding to mass casualties, dealing with disease outbreaks, and preparing for wartime missions. Simulation-based training can be a valuable training modality in these situations, as it allows opportunities to practice and prepare for high-risk and often low-frequency events. During the 8th Annual Meeting of the Consortium of the American College of Surgeons-Accredited Education Institutes in March 2015, a multidisciplinary panel was assembled to discuss how simulation can be used to prepare the surgical community for such high-risk events. An overview of how simulation has been used to address needs in each of these situations is presented.

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 5 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 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 132 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 20 15%
Student > Master 16 12%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Researcher 7 5%
Other 21 16%
Unknown 43 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 34 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 15%
Social Sciences 7 5%
Engineering 5 4%
Arts and Humanities 4 3%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 49 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 05 July 2016.
All research outputs
#8,186,806
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Surgery
#2,626
of 6,474 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,082
of 342,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgery
#36
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,474 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 342,343 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 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 68% of its contemporaries.