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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The Risk Instrument for Screening in the Community (RISC): a new instrument for predicting risk of adverse outcomes in community dwelling older adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12877-015-0095-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rónán O’Caoimh, Yang Gao, Anton Svendrovski, Elizabeth Healy, Elizabeth O’Connell, Gabrielle O’Keeffe, Una Cronin, Estera Igras, Eileen O’Herlihy, Carol Fitzgerald, Elizabeth Weathers, Patricia Leahy-Warren, Nicola Cornally, D. William Molloy |
| Abstract |
Predicting risk of adverse healthcare outcomes, among community dwelling older adults, is difficult. The Risk Instrument for Screening in the Community (RISC) is a short (2-5 min), global subjective assessment of risk created to identify patients' 1-year risk of three outcomes:institutionalisation, hospitalisation and death. We compared the accuracy and predictive ability of the RISC, scored by Public Health Nurses (PHN), to the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in a prospective cohort study of community dwelling older adults (n = 803), in two Irish PHN sectors. The area under the curve (AUC), from receiver operating characteristic curves and binary logistic regression models, with odds ratios (OR), compared the discriminatory characteristics of the RISC and CFS. Follow-up data were available for 801 patients. The 1-year incidence of institutionalisation, hospitalisation and death were 10.2, 17.7 and 15.6 % respectively. Patients scored maximum-risk (RISC score 3,4 or 5/5) at baseline had a significantly greater rate of institutionalisation (31.3 and 7.1 %, p < 0.001), hospitalisation (25.4 and 13.2 %, p < 0.001) and death (33.5 and 10.8 %, p < 0.001), than those scored minimum-risk (score 1 or 2/5). The RISC had comparable accuracy for 1-year risk of institutionalisation (AUC of 0.70 versus 0.63), hospitalisation (AUC 0.61 versus 0.55), and death (AUC 0.70 versus 0.67), to the CFS. The RISC significantly added to the predictive accuracy of the regression model for institutionalisation (OR 1.43, p = 0.01), hospitalisation (OR 1.28, p = 0.01), and death (OR 1.58, p = 0.001). Follow-up outcomes matched well with baseline risk. The RISC, a short global subjective assessment, demonstrated satisfactory validity compared with the CFS. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 5 | 83% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 22 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 15% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 14 July 2017.
All research outputs
#6,860,489
of 23,170,347 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,647
of 3,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,265
of 263,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#20
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,170,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,280 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 263,845 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.