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 |
Making Co-Enrolment Feasible for Randomised Controlled Trials in Paediatric Intensive Care
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0041791 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katie Harron, Twin Lee, Tracy Ball, Quen Mok, Carrol Gamble, Duncan Macrae, Ruth Gilbert, on behalf of CATCH. team |
| Abstract |
Enrolling children into several trials could increase recruitment and lead to quicker delivery of optimal care in paediatric intensive care units (PICU). We evaluated decisions taken by clinicians and parents in PICU on co-enrolment for two large pragmatic trials: the CATCH trial (CATheters in CHildren) comparing impregnated with standard central venous catheters (CVCs) for reducing bloodstream infection in PICU and the CHIP trial comparing tight versus standard control of hyperglycaemia. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 22% |
| Unknown | 17 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 39% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 16 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 August 2012.
All research outputs
#18,312,024
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#153,821
of 193,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,183
of 164,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,180
of 4,050 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 164,736 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,050 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.