↓ Skip to main content

Use of handheld computers in clinical practice: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#23 of 2,141)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
67 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
222 Mendeley
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.
Title
Use of handheld computers in clinical practice: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6947-14-56
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sharon Mickan, Helen Atherton, Nia Wyn Roberts, Carl Heneghan, Julie K Tilson

Abstract

Many healthcare professionals use smartphones and tablets to inform patient care. Contemporary research suggests that handheld computers may support aspects of clinical diagnosis and management. This systematic review was designed to synthesise high quality evidence to answer the question; Does healthcare professionals' use of handheld computers improve their access to information and support clinical decision making at the point of care?

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 67 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 222 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 1%
Germany 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 213 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 36 16%
Student > Master 35 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 11%
Other 17 8%
Student > Bachelor 15 7%
Other 53 24%
Unknown 42 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 13%
Computer Science 27 12%
Psychology 14 6%
Social Sciences 11 5%
Other 30 14%
Unknown 48 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. 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 30 December 2014.
All research outputs
#856,731
of 25,413,176 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#23
of 2,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,087
of 242,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,413,176 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,141 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 242,294 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.