| Title |
Does adding risk-trends to survival models improve in-hospital mortality predictions? A cohort study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, July 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-11-171 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jenna Wong, Monica Taljaard, Alan J Forster, Carl van Walraven |
| Abstract |
Clinicians informally assess changes in patients' status over time to prognosticate their outcomes. The incorporation of trends in patient status into regression models could improve their ability to predict outcomes. In this study, we used a unique approach to measure trends in patient hospital death risk and determined whether the incorporation of these trend measures into a survival model improved the accuracy of its risk predictions. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| Vietnam | 1 | 6% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 12 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 25% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 19% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 25% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 19% |
| Unknown | 3 | 19% |
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 14 September 2011.
All research outputs
#20,145,561
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#7,045
of 7,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,903
of 119,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#45
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 119,261 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.