↓ Skip to main content

Comprehensive geriatric care for patients with hip fractures: a prospective, randomised, controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in The Lancet, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
196 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
10 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
320 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
394 Mendeley
Title
Comprehensive geriatric care for patients with hip fractures: a prospective, randomised, controlled trial
Published in
The Lancet, April 2015
DOI 10.1016/s0140-6736(14)62409-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anders Prestmo, Gunhild Hagen, Olav Sletvold, Jorunn L Helbostad, Pernille Thingstad, Kristin Taraldsen, Stian Lydersen, Vidar Halsteinli, Turi Saltnes, Sarah E Lamb, Lars G Johnsen, Ingvild Saltvedt

Abstract

Most patients with hip fractures are characterised by older age (>70 years), frailty, and functional deterioration, and their long-term outcomes are poor with increased costs. We compared the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of giving these patients comprehensive geriatric care in a dedicated geriatric ward versus the usual orthopaedic care.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 196 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 394 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 3 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Norway 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 383 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 59 15%
Other 53 13%
Researcher 40 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 9%
Student > Postgraduate 35 9%
Other 101 26%
Unknown 69 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 193 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 38 10%
Social Sciences 9 2%
Psychology 7 2%
Neuroscience 6 2%
Other 35 9%
Unknown 106 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 180. 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 November 2019.
All research outputs
#126,056
of 17,977,824 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#1,854
of 37,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,010
of 298,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#25
of 540 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,977,824 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 37,004 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 57.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 298,361 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 540 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 95% of its contemporaries.