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 |
A knowledge-based taxonomy of critical factors for adopting electronic health record systems by physicians: a systematic literature review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, October 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-10-60 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Víctor H Castillo, Ana I Martínez-García, JRG Pulido |
| Abstract |
The health care sector is an area of social and economic interest in several countries; therefore, there have been lots of efforts in the use of electronic health records. Nevertheless, there is evidence suggesting that these systems have not been adopted as it was expected, and although there are some proposals to support their adoption, the proposed support is not by means of information and communication technology which can provide automatic tools of support. The aim of this study is to identify the critical adoption factors for electronic health records by physicians and to use them as a guide to support their adoption process automatically. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 395 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 6 | 2% |
| United States | 4 | 1% |
| Brazil | 3 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 2 | <1% |
| Argentina | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 8 | 2% |
| Unknown | 365 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 78 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 61 | 15% |
| Researcher | 51 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 27 | 7% |
| Other | 95 | 24% |
| Unknown | 49 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 91 | 23% |
| Computer Science | 85 | 22% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 45 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 34 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 6% |
| Other | 54 | 14% |
| Unknown | 64 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 August 2013.
All research outputs
#15,332,207
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1,252
of 2,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,550
of 100,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#15
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,027 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 100,682 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.