Prospective use of a clinical decision rule to identify pulmonary embolism as likely cause of outpatient cardiac arrest.

Overview of attention for article published in Resuscitation, April 2005
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#10 of 1,576)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
95 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
Title
Prospective use of a clinical decision rule to identify pulmonary embolism as likely cause of outpatient cardiac arrest.
Published in
Resuscitation, April 2005
DOI 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2004.07.018
Pubmed ID
Authors

Courtney DM, Kline JA

Abstract

A clinical decision rule (CDR) derived retrospectively found that 57% of outpatients aged 65 years or less, with witnessed arrest+PEA had pulmonary embolism (PE) as cause of cardiac arrest. These retrospectively studied patients also had significant frequency of pre-arrest respiratory distress, altered mental status, and shock.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 95 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 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 9%
Unknown 10 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 18%
Researcher 2 18%
Student > Bachelor 2 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 9%
Other 3 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 73%
Psychology 1 9%
Social Sciences 1 9%
Engineering 1 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 72. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 August 2015.
All research outputs
#71,555
of 5,407,936 outputs
Outputs from Resuscitation
#10
of 1,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,873
of 129,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Resuscitation
#1
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,407,936 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. 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 129,574 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 96% of its contemporaries.