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 |
Health care providers’ perceptions of use and influence of clinical decision support reminders: qualitative study following a randomized trial to improve HPV vaccination rates
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12911-017-0521-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brian E. Dixon, Monica L. Kasting, Shannon Wilson, Amit Kulkarni, Gregory D. Zimet, Stephen M. Downs |
| Abstract |
Human Papillomavirus (HPV) leads to serious health issues and remains the most common sexually transmitted infection. Despite availability of effective vaccines, HPV vaccination rates are suboptimal. Furthermore, providers recommend the HPV vaccine less than half the time for eligible patients. Prior informatics research has demonstrated the effectiveness of computer-based clinical decision support (CDS) in changing provider behavior, especially in the area of preventative services. Following a randomized clinical trial to test the effect of a CDS intervention on HPV vaccination rates, we conducted semi-structured interviews with health care providers to understand whether they noticed the CDS reminders and why providers did or did not respond to the prompts. Eighteen providers, a mix of medical doctors and nurse practitioners, were interviewed from five publicly-funded, urban health clinics. Interview data were qualitatively analyzed by two independent researchers using inductive content analysis. While most providers recalled seeing the CDS reminders, few of them perceived the intervention as effective in changing their behavior. Providers stated many reasons for why they did not perceive a change in their behavior, yet the results of the trial showed HPV vaccination rates increased as a result of the intervention. CDS reminders may be effective at changing provider behavior even if providers perceive them to be of little use. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02551887 Registered on September 15, 2015. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 91 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 21% |
| Researcher | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 31 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 3% |
| Psychology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 11% |
| Unknown | 39 | 43% |
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 13 August 2017.
All research outputs
#13,566,919
of 24,059,832 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#891
of 2,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,990
of 321,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#22
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,059,832 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,054 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 321,158 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.