↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Risk assessment tools for the prevention of pressure ulcers

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
119 tweeters
facebook
10 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 Mendeley
Title
Risk assessment tools for the prevention of pressure ulcers
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006471.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zena EH Moore, Seamus Cowman

Abstract

Use of pressure ulcer risk assessment tools or scales is a component of the assessment process used to identify individuals at risk of developing a pressure ulcer. Indeed, use of a risk assessment tool is recommended by many international pressure ulcer prevention guidelines, however it is not known whether using a risk assessment tool makes a difference to patient outcomes. We conducted a review to provide a summary of the evidence pertaining to pressure ulcer risk assessment in clinical practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 119 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 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Bahrain 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 163 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 21%
Student > Bachelor 26 16%
Researcher 18 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 7%
Other 33 20%
Unknown 26 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 57 35%
Medicine and Dentistry 47 28%
Psychology 7 4%
Engineering 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 14 8%
Unknown 31 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 89. 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 24 October 2019.
All research outputs
#390,134
of 22,444,133 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#721
of 12,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,157
of 293,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#14
of 174 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,444,133 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 293,042 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 174 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.