↓ Skip to main content

The prevalence of non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP) using emergency department (ED) data: a Northern Ireland based study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
The prevalence of non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP) using emergency department (ED) data: a Northern Ireland based study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2493-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Orla McDevitt-Petrovic, Karen Kirby, Mark Shevlin

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the frequency of chest pain presentations and the subsequent non-cardiac chest pain diagnoses in an emergency department (ED) over a 3 year period. Administrative data on ED attendances to an urban general hospital in Northern Ireland between March 2013 and March 2016 were used. Data were coded and analysed to estimate frequencies of 'chest pain' presentation and the subsequent diagnoses for each year. Both chest pain presentations and chest pain presentations with a subsequent diagnosis of unknown cause increased each year. In total, 58.7% of all chest presentations across 3 years resulted in a non-cardiac diagnosis of either 'anxiety', 'panic' or 'chest pain of unknown cause'. There is a significant amount of patients in the ED leaving with a non-cardiac diagnosis, following an initial presentation with chest pain. Given the link between non-cardiac chest pain and frequent use of services, the degree of repeat attendance should be investigated.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 18%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 6 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 36%
Sports and Recreations 2 9%
Computer Science 2 9%
Psychology 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 6 27%

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 06 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,998,008
of 12,606,240 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,443
of 4,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,982
of 268,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,606,240 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,173 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 268,775 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them