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 |
Comparative evaluation of different medication safety measures for the emergency department: physicians’ usage and acceptance of training, poster, checklist and computerized decision support
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-13-79 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brita Sedlmayr, Andrius Patapovas, Melanie Kirchner, Anja Sonst, Fabian Müller, Barbara Pfistermeister, Bettina Plank-Kiegele, Renate Vogler, Manfred Criegee-Rieck, Hans-Ulrich Prokosch, Harald Dormann, Renke Maas, Thomas Bürkle |
| Abstract |
Although usage and acceptance are important factors for a successful implementation of clinical decision support systems for medication, most studies only concentrate on their design and outcome. Our objective was to comparatively investigate a set of traditional medication safety measures such as medication safety training for physicians, paper-based posters and checklists concerning potential medication problems versus the additional benefit of a computer-assisted medication check. We concentrated on usage, acceptance and suitability of such interventions in a busy emergency department (ED) of a 749 bed acute tertiary care hospital. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 3 | 75% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Egypt | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 142 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 9% |
| Researcher | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 26 | 18% |
| Unknown | 31 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 28% |
| Computer Science | 20 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 6% |
| Psychology | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 23 | 16% |
| Unknown | 36 | 25% |
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 03 August 2013.
All research outputs
#13,847,976
of 23,605,418 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#993
of 2,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,716
of 199,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#23
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,605,418 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,028 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 50% 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 199,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.