↓ Skip to main content

Acute pain from the perspective of minor trauma patients treated at the emergency unit

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Gaúcha de Enfermagem, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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.
Title
Acute pain from the perspective of minor trauma patients treated at the emergency unit
Published in
Revista Gaúcha de Enfermagem, June 2015
DOI 10.1590/1983-1447.2015.02.48728
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Regina Martin, Jamyle Rubio Soares, Viviane Cazetta de Lima Vieira, Sonia Silva Marcon, Mayckel da Silva Barreto

Abstract

To study the factors that influence the perception of acute pain and the consequences of this experience in patients suffering from mild trauma. Descriptive qualitative study conducted in an emergency service in southern Brazil. Data was collected in October 2013, through semi-structured interviews with 29 individuals who reported pain after physical trauma, regardless of the triggering factor. To process the data, we used a Content Analysis technique, subject modality. Two categories emerged: Factors that influence the perception of pain resulting from trauma and, Consequences of acute pain due to trauma. The acute pain sensation was influenced by biological, emotional, spiritual and socio-cultural factors and induced biological and emotional consequences for individuals. The health professionals need to consider the factors that influence soreness and its consequences for the proper assessment and management of pain resulting from trauma.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 19%
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 13%
Researcher 4 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 18 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 21%
Psychology 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Unspecified 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 24 38%
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 10 October 2015.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Revista Gaúcha de Enfermagem
#100
of 236 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,503
of 281,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Gaúcha de Enfermagem
#4
of 9 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 236 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 281,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.