↓ Skip to main content

Interventions to increase clinical incident reporting in health care

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Interventions to increase clinical incident reporting in health care
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005609.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Parmelli E, Flodgren G, Fraser SG, Williams N, Rubin G, Eccles MP

Abstract

Reporting of adverse clinical events is thought to be an effective method of improving the safety of healthcare. Underreporting of these adverse events is often said to occur with consequence of missing of opportunities to learn from these incidents. A clinical incident can be defined as any occurrence which is not consistent with the routine care of the patient or the routine operation of the institution.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 68 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 7%
Other 27 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 13%
Psychology 6 9%
Unspecified 5 7%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Other 11 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 11 December 2015.
All research outputs
#2,545,302
of 12,100,779 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,289
of 7,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,311
of 144,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#53
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,100,779 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,978 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 144,220 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 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 58% of its contemporaries.