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 |
People, organizational, and leadership factors impacting informatics support for clinical and translational research
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-13-20 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Philip RO Payne, Taylor R Pressler, Indra Neil Sarkar, Yves Lussier |
| Abstract |
In recent years, there have been numerous initiatives undertaken to describe critical information needs related to the collection, management, analysis, and dissemination of data in support of biomedical research (J Investig Med 54:327-333, 2006); (J Am Med Inform Assoc 16:316-327, 2009); (Physiol Genomics 39:131-140, 2009); (J Am Med Inform Assoc 18:354-357, 2011). A common theme spanning such reports has been the importance of understanding and optimizing people, organizational, and leadership factors in order to achieve the promise of efficient and timely research (J Am Med Inform Assoc 15:283-289, 2008). With the emergence of clinical and translational science (CTS) as a national priority in the United States, and the corresponding growth in the scale and scope of CTS research programs, the acuity of such information needs continues to increase (JAMA 289:1278-1287, 2003); (N Engl J Med 353:1621-1623, 2005); (Sci Transl Med 3:90, 2011). At the same time, systematic evaluations of optimal people, organizational, and leadership factors that influence the provision of data, information, and knowledge management technologies and methods are notably lacking. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 80% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 55 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 21% |
| Unknown | 10 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 11% |
| Engineering | 5 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 29% |
| Unknown | 10 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 April 2013.
All research outputs
#13,363,602
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#872
of 2,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,161
of 288,505 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#26
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,030 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 288,505 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.