↓ Skip to main content

The National Trauma Institute

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, The, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 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
The National Trauma Institute
Published in
Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, The, September 2016
DOI 10.1097/ta.0000000000001080
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle A. Price, Gregory J. Beilman, Timothy C. Fabian, David B. Hoyt, Gregory J. Jurkovich, M. Margaret Knudson, Ellen J. MacKenzie, Vivienne S. Marshall, Kimberly E. Overton, Andrew B. Peitzman, Monica J. Phillips, Basil A. Pruitt, Sharon L. Smith, Ronald M. Stewart, Donald H. Jenkins

Abstract

In order to increase trauma-related research and elevate trauma on the national research agenda, the National Trauma Institute (NTI) issued calls for proposals, selected funding recipients and coordinated sixteen federally funded (Department of Defense [DoD]) trauma research awards over a four-year period. We sought to collect and describe the lessons learned from this activity in order to inform future researchers of barriers and facilitators. Fifteen principal investigators participated in semi-structured interviews focused on study management issues such as securing institutional approvals, screening and enrollment, multi-site trials management, project funding, staffing and institutional support. NTI Science Committee meeting minutes and study management data were included in the analysis. Simple descriptive statistics were generated and textual data were analyzed for common themes. PIs reported challenges in obtaining institutional approvals, delays in study initiation, screening and enrollment, multi-site management and study funding. Most were able to successfully resolve challenges and have been productive in terms of scholarly publications, securing additional research funding and training future trauma investigators. Lessons learned in the conduct of the first two funding rounds managed by NTI are instructive in four key areas: regulatory processes, multi-site coordination, adequate funding and the importance of an established research infrastructure to ensure study success. Recommendations for addressing institution-related and investigator-related challenges are discussed along with ongoing advocacy efforts to secure sustained federal funding of a national trauma research program commensurate with the burden of injury. Not applicable.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 1 14%
Unknown 6 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 2 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 29%
Professor 2 29%
Student > Master 1 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 29%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 14%
Social Sciences 1 14%
Psychology 1 14%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 September 2016.
All research outputs
#2,084,604
of 12,454,104 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, The
#911
of 3,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,110
of 267,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, The
#82
of 163 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,454,104 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,054 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 267,978 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 163 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 50% of its contemporaries.