↓ Skip to main content

Validation of an Electronic Surgical Outcomes Database at Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital, Uganda

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgery, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
Validation of an Electronic Surgical Outcomes Database at Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital, Uganda
Published in
World Journal of Surgery, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00268-017-4172-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Geoffrey A. Anderson, Lenka Ilcisin, Joseph Ngonzi, Stephen Ttendo, Deus Twesigye, Noralis Portal Benitez, Paul Firth, Deepika Nehra

Abstract

Accurate, complete and sustainable methods of tracking patients and outcomes in low-resource settings are imperative as we launch efforts to improve surgical care globally. The Surgical services QUality Assessment Database (SQUAD) at the Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital in Uganda is one of very few electronic surgical databases in a low-resource setting. We evaluated the completeness and accuracy of SQUAD. Data were prospectively collected on 20 of the most clinically relevant variables captured by SQUAD for all general surgery patients admitted to MRRH over a two-week period. Patients were followed until discharge, death or hospital day 30; whichever occurred first. These data were compared to that in SQUAD for the same time period for completeness and accuracy. Of 186 unique patients seen over the two-week period, 172 (92.5%) were captured by SQUAD. The capture rate was greater than 86% for each of the 20 variables evaluated, except American Society of Anesthesiologists score, which had a 69% capture rate. Regarding accuracy, there was almost perfect agreement for 16/20 variables (all k > 0.81), substantial agreement for 2/20 variables (k 0.63, 0.73) and moderate agreement for the remaining 2/20 variables (k 0.43, 0.48) between SQUAD and the prospectively collected data. SQUAD is an electronic surgical database that has been implemented and sustained in a low-resource setting. For the 20 variables evaluated, the data within SQUAD are highly complete and accurate. This database may serve as a model for the development of additional surgical databases in low-resource environments.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 13%
Student > Master 5 13%
Lecturer 2 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 13 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 34%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 16 42%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 May 2020.
All research outputs
#14,077,124
of 22,996,001 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#2,720
of 4,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,899
of 317,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#47
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,996,001 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,258 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 317,751 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.