↓ Skip to main content

The challenges in monitoring and preventing patient safety incidents for people with intellectual disabilities in NHS acute hospitals: evidence from a mixed-methods study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 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 challenges in monitoring and preventing patient safety incidents for people with intellectual disabilities in NHS acute hospitals: evidence from a mixed-methods study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-14-432
Pubmed ID
Authors

Irene Tuffrey-Wijne, Lucy Goulding, Vanessa Gordon, Elisabeth Abraham, Nikoletta Giatras, Christine Edwards, Steve Gillard, Sheila Hollins

Abstract

There has been evidence in recent years that people with intellectual disabilities in acute hospitals are at risk of preventable deterioration due to failures of the healthcare services to implement the reasonable adjustments they need. The aim of this paper is to explore the challenges in monitoring and preventing patient safety incidents involving people with intellectual disabilities, to describe patient safety issues faced by patients with intellectual disabilities in NHS acute hospitals, and investigate underlying contributory factors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 110 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 12%
Researcher 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 5%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 41 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 14%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Psychology 7 6%
Computer Science 5 5%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 44 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 21 October 2020.
All research outputs
#1,947,421
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#717
of 7,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,272
of 253,937 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#15
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 253,937 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.