↓ Skip to main content

A method for extracting electronic patient record data from practice management software systems used in veterinary practice

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
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.
Title
A method for extracting electronic patient record data from practice management software systems used in veterinary practice
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12917-016-0861-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie S. Jones-Diette, Marnie L. Brennan, Malcolm Cobb, Hannah Doit, Rachel S. Dean

Abstract

Data extracted from electronic patient records (EPRs) within practice management software systems are increasingly used in veterinary research. The use of real patient data gives the potential to generate research that can readily be applied to clinical practice. The use of veterinary EPRs for research in the United Kingdom is hindered by the number of different Practice Management System (PMS) providers used by practices, as obtaining and combining data from different systems electronically can be problematic. The use of extensible mark up language (XML) to extract clinical data for research would potentially resolve the compatibility issues between systems. The aim of this study was to establish and validate a method for the extraction of small animal patient records from a veterinary PMS that could potentially be used across multiple systems. An XML schema was designed to extract clinical information from EPRs. The schema was tested and validated in a test system, and was then tested in a real small animal practice where data was extracted for 16 weeks. A 10 % sample of the extracted records was then compared to paper copies provided by the practice. All 21 fields encoded by the XML schema, from all of the records in the test system, were extracted with 100 % accuracy. Over the 18 week data collection period 4946 records, from 1279 patients, were extracted from the small animal practice. The 10 % printed records checked and compared with the XML extracted records demonstrated all required data was present. No unrequired, sensitive information e.g. costs or services/products or personal client information was extracted. This is the first time a method for data extraction from EPRs in veterinary practice using an XML schema has been reported in the United Kingdom. This is an efficient and accurate way of extracting data which could be applied to all PMSs nationally and internationally.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 18%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Master 4 8%
Lecturer 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 14 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 18 37%
Computer Science 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Mathematics 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 15 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 29 November 2016.
All research outputs
#13,770,151
of 24,162,843 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#859
of 3,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,418
of 320,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#19
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,162,843 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,120 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 320,982 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.