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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
How well do clinical prediction rules perform in identifying serious infections in acutely ill children across an international network of ambulatory care datasets?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7015-11-10 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jan Y Verbakel, Ann Van den Bruel, Matthew Thompson, Richard Stevens, Bert Aertgeerts, Rianne Oostenbrink, Henriette A Moll, Marjolein Y Berger, Monica Lakhanpaul, David Mant, Frank Buntinx, the European Research Network on Recognising Serious Infection (ERNIE) |
| Abstract |
Diagnosing serious infections in children is challenging, because of the low incidence of such infections and their non-specific presentation early in the course of illness. Prediction rules are promoted as a means to improve recognition of serious infections. A recent systematic review identified seven clinical prediction rules, of which only one had been prospectively validated, calling into question their appropriateness for clinical practice. We aimed to examine the diagnostic accuracy of these rules in multiple ambulatory care populations in Europe. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 36% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 14% |
| Australia | 1 | 7% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Spain | 1 | 7% |
| Canada | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 21% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 14% |
| Scientists | 2 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 124 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 14 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 9% |
| Other | 29 | 23% |
| Unknown | 21 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 76 | 60% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Unknown | 27 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 01 March 2023.
All research outputs
#1,594,141
of 23,474,618 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,117
of 3,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,891
of 310,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#32
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,474,618 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,539 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 310,519 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 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 59% of its contemporaries.