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 |
A qualitative evaluation of general practitioners’ views on protocol-driven eReferral in Scotland
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-14-30 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matt-Mouley Bouamrane, Frances S Mair |
| Abstract |
The ever increasing volume of referrals from primary care to specialist services is putting considerable pressure on resource-constrained health services while effective communication across fragmented services remains a substantial challenge. Previous studies have suggested that electronic referrals (eReferral) can bear important benefits for cross-organisational processes and patient care management. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| India | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 111 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 23 | 20% |
| Researcher | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 11% |
| Other | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 18% |
| Unknown | 25 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 9 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Unknown | 30 | 27% |
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 12 April 2014.
All research outputs
#14,194,875
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1,100
of 1,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,081
of 228,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#16
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,985 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 228,038 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.