↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Article Metrics

Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma when jumping from aircraft: randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in British Medical Journal, December 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 44,784)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
319 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma when jumping from aircraft: randomized controlled trial
Published in
British Medical Journal, December 2018
DOI 10.1136/bmj.k5094
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert W Yeh, Linda R Valsdottir, Michael W Yeh, Changyu Shen, Daniel B Kramer, Jordan B Strom, Eric A Secemsky, Joanne L Healy, Robert M Domeier, Dhruv S Kazi, Brahmajee K Nallamothu

Abstract

To determine if using a parachute prevents death or major traumatic injury when jumping from an aircraft. Randomized controlled trial. Private or commercial aircraft between September 2017 and August 2018. 92 aircraft passengers aged 18 and over were screened for participation. 23 agreed to be enrolled and were randomized. Jumping from an aircraft (airplane or helicopter) with a parachute versus an empty backpack (unblinded). Composite of death or major traumatic injury (defined by an Injury Severity Score over 15) upon impact with the ground measured immediately after landing. Parachute use did not significantly reduce death or major injury (0% for parachute v 0% for control; P>0.9). This finding was consistent across multiple subgroups. Compared with individuals screened but not enrolled, participants included in the study were on aircraft at significantly lower altitude (mean of 0.6 m for participants v mean of 9146 m for non-participants; P<0.001) and lower velocity (mean of 0 km/h v mean of 800 km/h; P<0.001). Parachute use did not reduce death or major traumatic injury when jumping from aircraft in the first randomized evaluation of this intervention. However, the trial was only able to enroll participants on small stationary aircraft on the ground, suggesting cautious extrapolation to high altitude jumps. When beliefs regarding the effectiveness of an intervention exist in the community, randomized trials might selectively enroll individuals with a lower perceived likelihood of benefit, thus diminishing the applicability of the results to clinical practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8,777 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 319 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 319 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 60 19%
Researcher 52 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 11%
Student > Master 30 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 28 9%
Other 115 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 132 41%
Unspecified 41 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 6%
Psychology 18 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 4%
Other 96 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6369. 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 17 October 2019.
All research outputs
#33
of 13,640,416 outputs
Outputs from British Medical Journal
#1
of 44,784 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4
of 347,803 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Medical Journal
#1
of 697 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,640,416 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 44,784 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 99% 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 347,803 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 697 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 99% of its contemporaries.