| Title |
A Public Health Economic Assessment of Hospitals' Cost to Screen Newborns for Critical Congenital Heart Disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Public Health Reports, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1177/003335491412900113 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cora Peterson, Scott D. Grosse, Jill Glidewell, Lorraine F. Garg, Kim Van Naarden Braun, Mary M. Knapp, Leslie M. Beres, Cynthia F. Hinton, Richard S. Olney, Cynthia H. Cassell |
| Abstract |
Critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) was recently added to the U.S. Recommended Uniform Screening Panel for newborns. This evaluation aimed to estimate screening time and hospital cost per newborn screened for CCHD using pulse oximetry as part of a public health economic assessment of CCHD screening. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 60% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 88 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 12% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 21 | 23% |
| Unknown | 22 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 14% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 26 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 12 March 2014.
All research outputs
#13,314,015
of 23,975,876 outputs
Outputs from Public Health Reports
#2,037
of 2,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,186
of 312,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Public Health Reports
#21
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,876 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,758 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 312,358 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.