↓ Skip to main content

Outcomes of medical emergencies on commercial airline flights.

Overview of attention for article published in New England Journal of Medicine, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
208 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
Outcomes of medical emergencies on commercial airline flights.
Published in
New England Journal of Medicine, May 2013
DOI 10.1056/nejmoa1212052
Pubmed ID
Authors

Drew C. Peterson, Christian Martin-Gill, Francis X. Guyette, Adam Z. Tobias, Catherine E. McCarthy, Scott T. Harrington, Theodore R. Delbridge, Donald M. Yealy, Peterson, Drew C, Martin-Gill, Christian, Guyette, Francis X, Tobias, Adam Z, McCarthy, Catherine E, Harrington, Scott T, Delbridge, Theodore R, Yealy, Donald M, Peterson, Drew C.

Abstract

Worldwide, 2.75 billion passengers fly on commercial airlines annually. When in-flight medical emergencies occur, access to care is limited. We describe in-flight medical emergencies and the outcomes of these events. We reviewed records of in-flight medical emergency calls from five domestic and international airlines to a physician-directed medical communications center from January 1, 2008, through October 31, 2010. We characterized the most common medical problems and the type of on-board assistance rendered. We determined the incidence of and factors associated with unscheduled aircraft diversion, transport to a hospital, and hospital admission, and we determined the incidence of death. There were 11,920 in-flight medical emergencies resulting in calls to the center (1 medical emergency per 604 flights). The most common problems were syncope or presyncope (37.4% of cases), respiratory symptoms (12.1%), and nausea or vomiting (9.5%). Physician passengers provided medical assistance in 48.1% of in-flight medical emergencies, and aircraft diversion occurred in 7.3%. Of 10,914 patients for whom postflight follow-up data were available, 25.8% were transported to a hospital by emergency-medical-service personnel, 8.6% were admitted, and 0.3% died. The most common triggers for admission were possible stroke (odds ratio, 3.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.88 to 6.03), respiratory symptoms (odds ratio, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.48 to 3.06), and cardiac symptoms (odds ratio, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.77). Most in-flight medical emergencies were related to syncope, respiratory symptoms, or gastrointestinal symptoms, and a physician was frequently the responding medical volunteer. Few in-flight medical emergencies resulted in diversion of aircraft or death; one fourth of passengers who had an in-flight medical emergency underwent additional evaluation in a hospital. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health.).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 826 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 208 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
Brazil 4 2%
Canada 4 2%
Japan 3 1%
Germany 2 <1%
Korea, Republic of 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
Slovakia 1 <1%
Other 8 4%
Unknown 175 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 43 21%
Researcher 33 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 11%
Student > Master 21 10%
Student > Postgraduate 21 10%
Other 67 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 172 83%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 5%
Computer Science 4 2%
Engineering 4 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 1%
Other 15 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1117. 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 20 June 2017.
All research outputs
#1,263
of 7,932,087 outputs
Outputs from New England Journal of Medicine
#83
of 19,612 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13
of 122,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New England Journal of Medicine
#3
of 337 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,932,087 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,612 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 46.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 122,166 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 337 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.