↓ Skip to main content

“Reducing unnecessary testing in a CPOE system through implementation of a targeted CDS intervention”

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 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
“Reducing unnecessary testing in a CPOE system through implementation of a targeted CDS intervention”
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6947-13-43
Pubmed ID
Authors

Donald L Levick, Glenn Stern, Chad D Meyerhoefer, Aaron Levick, David Pucklavage

Abstract

We describe and evaluate the development and use of a Clinical Decision Support (CDS) intervention; an alert, in response to an identified medical error of overuse of a diagnostic laboratory test in a Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) system. CPOE with embedded CDS has been shown to improve quality of care and reduce medical errors. CPOE can also improve resource utilization through more appropriate use of laboratory tests and diagnostic studies. Observational studies are necessary in order to understand how these technologies can be successfully employed by healthcare providers.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Mexico 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 93 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 22%
Other 15 15%
Researcher 15 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 10 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 10%
Computer Science 9 9%
Social Sciences 8 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 13 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 28 November 2013.
All research outputs
#7,784,848
of 12,409,138 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#781
of 1,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,557
of 143,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,409,138 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 143,834 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.