↓ Skip to main content

Calculating the return on investment of mobile healthcare

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, June 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
161 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Calculating the return on investment of mobile healthcare
Published in
BMC Medicine, June 2009
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-7-27
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nancy E Oriol, Paul J Cote, Anthony P Vavasis, Jennifer Bennet, Darien DeLorenzo, Philip Blanc, Isaac Kohane

Abstract

Mobile health clinics provide an alternative portal into the healthcare system for the medically disenfranchised, that is, people who are underinsured, uninsured or who are otherwise outside of mainstream healthcare due to issues of trust, language, immigration status or simply location. Mobile health clinics as providers of last resort are an essential component of the healthcare safety net providing prevention, screening, and appropriate triage into mainstream services. Despite the face value of providing services to underserved populations, a focused analysis of the relative value of the mobile health clinic model has not been elucidated. The question that the return on investment algorithm has been designed to answer is: can the value of the services provided by mobile health programs be quantified in terms of quality adjusted life years saved and estimated emergency department expenditures avoided?

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 161 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 156 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 46 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 12%
Researcher 15 9%
Other 13 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 30 19%
Unknown 26 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 29%
Social Sciences 16 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 9 6%
Computer Science 8 5%
Other 32 20%
Unknown 35 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 79. 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 22 August 2022.
All research outputs
#501,017
of 24,180,797 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#381
of 3,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,201
of 117,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,180,797 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,698 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 117,698 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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 91% of its contemporaries.