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 |
Debate: what is the best method to monitor surgical performance?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Surgery, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12893-016-0131-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stefan H. Steiner, William H. Woodall |
| Abstract |
There is considerable recent interest in the monitoring of individual surgeon or hospital surgical outcomes. If one aggregates data over time and assesses performance with a funnel plot, then the detection of any process deterioration or improvement could be delayed. The variable life adjusted display (VLAD) is widely used for monitoring on a case-by-case basis, but we show that use of the risk-adjusted Bernoulli cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) chart leads to much better performance. We use simulation to illustrate that the RA-CUSUM chart has better performance than the VLAD in detecting changes in the rates of adverse events. We recommend the RA-CUSUM approach over the VLAD approach for monitoring surgical performance. If the VLAD is used, we recommend running the RA-CUSUM chart in the background to generate signals that the process performance has changed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 33% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 56% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 8 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 45% |
| Engineering | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 10 | 45% |
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 20 May 2016.
All research outputs
#7,345,736
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Surgery
#148
of 1,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,820
of 303,331 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Surgery
#7
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,359 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 303,331 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.