↓ Skip to main content
What is this page? Embed badge

Implementation of an In Situ Qualitative Debriefing Tool for Resuscitations

Overview of attention for article published in Resuscitation, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
196 Mendeley
Summary Twitter Dimensions citations
Title
Implementation of an In Situ Qualitative Debriefing Tool for Resuscitations
Published in
Resuscitation, July 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.12.005
Pubmed ID
23266394
Authors

Paul C. Mullan, Elizabeth Wuestner, Tarra D. Kerr, Daniel P. Christopher, Binita Patel

Abstract

Multiple guidelines recommend debriefing of resuscitations to improve clinical performance. We implemented a novel standardized debriefing program using a Debriefing In Situ Conversation after Emergent Resuscitation Now (DISCERN) tool.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 196 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 189 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 17%
Researcher 24 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 8%
Other 14 7%
Other 55 28%
Unknown 36 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 87 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 39 20%
Psychology 5 3%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 2%
Other 13 7%
Unknown 45 23%

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 04 March 2021.
All research outputs
#15,268,549
of 22,705,019 outputs
Outputs from Resuscitation
#3,693
of 5,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,410
of 194,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Resuscitation
#39
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,705,019 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,320 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 194,634 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.

This page is provided by Altmetric.