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 user-friendly tool to transform large scale administrative data into wide table format using a mapreduce program with a pig latin based script
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-12-151 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hiromasa Horiguchi, Hideo Yasunaga, Hideki Hashimoto, Kazuhiko Ohe |
| Abstract |
Secondary use of large scale administrative data is increasingly popular in health services and clinical research, where a user-friendly tool for data management is in great demand. MapReduce technology such as Hadoop is a promising tool for this purpose, though its use has been limited by the lack of user-friendly functions for transforming large scale data into wide table format, where each subject is represented by one row, for use in health services and clinical research. Since the original specification of Pig provides very few functions for column field management, we have developed a novel system called GroupFilterFormat to handle the definition of field and data content based on a Pig Latin script. We have also developed, as an open-source project, several user-defined functions to transform the table format using GroupFilterFormat and to deal with processing that considers date conditions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 24% |
| Researcher | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 11 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 5 | 13% |
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 26 December 2012.
All research outputs
#17,673,866
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1,495
of 1,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,887
of 280,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#45
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,980 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 280,229 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.