↓ Skip to main content

Nurse staffing and education and hospital mortality in nine European countries: a retrospective observational study

Overview of attention for article published in The Lancet, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#44 of 32,044)
  • 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)

Mentioned by

news
30 news outlets
blogs
8 blogs
policy
4 policy sources
twitter
2126 tweeters
facebook
31 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
2 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
726 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
785 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Nurse staffing and education and hospital mortality in nine European countries: a retrospective observational study
Published in
The Lancet, May 2014
DOI 10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62631-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Linda H Aiken, Douglas M Sloane, Luk Bruyneel, Koen Van den Heede, Peter Griffiths, Reinhard Busse, Marianna Diomidous, Juha Kinnunen, Maria Kózka, Emmanuel Lesaffre, Matthew D McHugh, M T Moreno-Casbas, Anne Marie Rafferty, Rene Schwendimann, P Anne Scott, Carol Tishelman, Theo van Achterberg, Walter Sermeus

Abstract

Austerity measures and health-system redesign to minimise hospital expenditures risk adversely affecting patient outcomes. The RN4CAST study was designed to inform decision making about nursing, one of the largest components of hospital operating expenses. We aimed to assess whether differences in patient to nurse ratios and nurses' educational qualifications in nine of the 12 RN4CAST countries with similar patient discharge data were associated with variation in hospital mortality after common surgical procedures.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2,126 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 785 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 12 2%
Germany 7 <1%
Canada 6 <1%
United Kingdom 5 <1%
United States 4 <1%
Switzerland 4 <1%
Austria 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Belgium 2 <1%
Other 8 1%
Unknown 733 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 192 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 94 12%
Student > Bachelor 92 12%
Researcher 76 10%
Professor 63 8%
Other 268 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 292 37%
Medicine and Dentistry 218 28%
Unspecified 113 14%
Social Sciences 54 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 23 3%
Other 85 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1809. 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 19 September 2019.
All research outputs
#1,014
of 13,536,671 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#44
of 32,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15
of 187,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#1
of 514 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,536,671 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 32,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.8. 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 187,676 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 514 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.