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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Looking in the mirror: Self-debriefing versus instructor debriefing for simulated crises*
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care Medicine, June 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1097/ccm.0b013e31820eb8be |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sylvain Boet, M. Dylan Bould, Heinz R. Bruppacher, François Desjardins, Deven B. Chandra, Viren N. Naik |
| Abstract |
To examine the effectiveness of self-debriefing as compared to instructor debriefing in the change of nontechnical skills performance of anesthesiology residents. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 217 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 210 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 33 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 11% |
| Other | 22 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 22 | 10% |
| Researcher | 18 | 8% |
| Other | 69 | 32% |
| Unknown | 29 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 109 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 19 | 9% |
| Psychology | 9 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 6% |
| Unknown | 38 | 18% |
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 15 November 2012.
All research outputs
#16,046,765
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care Medicine
#7,140
of 9,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,238
of 122,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care Medicine
#51
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,339 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 122,178 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.