↓ Skip to main content

Retrospective record review in proactive patient safety work -- identification of no-harm incidents

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Retrospective record review in proactive patient safety work -- identification of no-harm incidents
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-13-282
Pubmed ID
Abstract

In contrast to other safety critical industries, well-developed systems to monitor safety within the healthcare system remain limited. Retrospective record review is one way of identifying adverse events in healthcare. In proactive patient safety work, retrospective record review could be used to identify, analyze and gain information and knowledge about no-harm incidents and deficiencies in healthcare processes. The aim of the study was to evaluate retrospective record review for the detection and characterization of no-harm incidents, and compare findings with conventional incident-reporting systems.

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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
Uruguay 1 3%
Unknown 27 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 28%
Student > Postgraduate 6 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 14%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 41%
Engineering 7 24%
Social Sciences 3 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 4 14%

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 25 July 2013.
All research outputs
#2,312,806
of 4,510,149 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,327
of 2,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,525
of 90,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#58
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,510,149 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,077 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 90,491 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.