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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A standardized assessment method for surgical ADEs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1111/jep.12033 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Monica de Boer, Jordy J. S. Kiewiet, Eveline B. Boeker, Maya A. Ramrattan, Marcel G. W. Dijkgraaf, Loraine Lie‐A‐Huen, Marja A. Boermeester, SUREPILL Study Group |
| Abstract |
This study demonstrates the development, reliability and outcome of a targeted method for standardized assessment of adverse drug events (ADEs) in surgical patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 37 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 16% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 9 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 37% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 12 | 32% |
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 24 December 2013.
All research outputs
#19,977,226
of 24,549,201 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
#1,289
of 1,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,807
of 201,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
#11
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,549,201 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,529 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 201,377 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.