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 |
De-identifying a public use microdata file from the Canadian national discharge abstract database
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-11-53 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Khaled El Emam, David Paton, Fida Dankar, Gunes Koru |
| Abstract |
The Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) collects hospital discharge abstract data (DAD) from Canadian provinces and territories. There are many demands for the disclosure of this data for research and analysis to inform policy making. To expedite the disclosure of data for some of these purposes, the construction of a DAD public use microdata file (PUMF) was considered. Such purposes include: confirming some published results, providing broader feedback to CIHI to improve data quality, training students and fellows, providing an easily accessible data set for researchers to prepare for analyses on the full DAD data set, and serve as a large health data set for computer scientists and statisticians to evaluate analysis and data mining techniques. The objective of this study was to measure the probability of re-identification for records in a PUMF, and to de-identify a national DAD PUMF consisting of 10% of records. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 2 | 67% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| United Arab Emirates | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 55 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 25% |
| Researcher | 13 | 22% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Librarian | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 16 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 13 | 22% |
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 02 November 2013.
All research outputs
#13,353,865
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#978
of 1,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,995
of 123,981 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,977 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 123,981 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.