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 |
An investigation of the effect of nurses’ technology readiness on the acceptance of mobile electronic medical record systems
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-13-88 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kuang-Ming Kuo, Chung-Feng Liu, Chen-Chung Ma |
| Abstract |
Adopting mobile electronic medical record (MEMR) systems is expected to be one of the superior approaches for improving nurses' bedside and point of care services. However, nurses may use the functions for far fewer tasks than the MEMR supports. This may depend on their technological personality associated to MEMR acceptance. The purpose of this study is to investigate nurses' personality traits in regard to technology readiness toward MEMR acceptance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 | 3 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 13% |
| Spain | 1 | 7% |
| India | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 53% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 550 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| Bangladesh | 2 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 539 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 125 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 84 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 46 | 8% |
| Researcher | 38 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 32 | 6% |
| Other | 88 | 16% |
| Unknown | 137 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 72 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 70 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 66 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 64 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 40 | 7% |
| Other | 79 | 14% |
| Unknown | 159 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 20 March 2014.
All research outputs
#3,521,020
of 25,263,619 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#277
of 2,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,968
of 204,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#9
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,263,619 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,137 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 204,667 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.