↓ Skip to main content

Correction to: Implementing goals of care conversations with veterans in VA long-term care setting: a mixed methods protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
5 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
Correction to: Implementing goals of care conversations with veterans in VA long-term care setting: a mixed methods protocol
Published in
Implementation Science, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13012-018-0724-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne E. Sales, Mary Ersek, Orna K. Intrator, Cari Levy, Joan G. Carpenter, Robert Hogikyan, Helen C. Kales, Zach Landis-Lewis, Tobie Olsan, Susan C. Miller, Marcos Montagnini, Vyjeyanthi S. Periyakoil, Sheri Reder

Abstract

The authors would like to correct errors in the original article [1] that may have lead readers to misinterpret the scope, evidence base and target population of VHA Handbook 1004.03 "Life-Sustaining Treatment (LST) Decisions: Eliciting, Documenting, and Honoring Patients' Values, Goals, and Preferences".

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 1 20%
Professor 1 20%
Librarian 1 20%
Other 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 1 20%
Computer Science 1 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 20%
Unknown 2 40%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 February 2018.
All research outputs
#11,102,280
of 12,484,918 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,280
of 1,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,645
of 341,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#33
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,484,918 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,307 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 341,883 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.