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 |
Clinical decision support tools: analysis of online drug information databases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, March 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-7-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kevin A Clauson, Wallace A Marsh, Hyla H Polen, Matthew J Seamon, Blanca I Ortiz |
| Abstract |
Online drug information databases are used to assist in enhancing clinical decision support. However, the choice of which online database to consult, purchase or subscribe to is likely made based on subjective elements such as history of use, familiarity, or availability during professional training. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical decision support tools for drug information by systematically comparing the most commonly used online drug information databases. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| India | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 7% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Argentina | 1 | 1% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 84 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 11% |
| Researcher | 9 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 29 | 30% |
| Unknown | 14 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 35% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 14 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 9 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 17 | 18% |
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 05 August 2013.
All research outputs
#16,292,673
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1,194
of 2,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,616
of 90,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,157 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 90,531 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.