↓ Skip to main content

Implementation of an In Situ Qualitative Debriefing Tool for Resuscitations

Overview of attention for article published in Resuscitation, July 2013
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
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 Mendeley
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
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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters 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 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 1%
Chile 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 138 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 17%
Researcher 20 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 13 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Other 41 28%
Unknown 24 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 72 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 17%
Psychology 5 3%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 32 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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
#9,757,465
of 17,363,630 outputs
Outputs from Resuscitation
#2,668
of 4,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,478
of 161,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Resuscitation
#41
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,363,630 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 161,986 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.