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 |
Using pathology-specific laboratory profiles in Clinical Pathology to reduce inappropriate test requesting: two completed audit cycles
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-12-187 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Roberto Baricchi, Michele Zini, Maria Grazia Nibali, Walter Vezzosi, Vincenzo Insegnante, Clotilde Manfuso, Alessandra Polese, Valmer Costoli, Antonio Spelti, Debora Formisano, Danilo Orlandini, Fausto Nicolini, Antonio Poli |
| Abstract |
Systematic reviews have shown that, although well prepared, the Consensus Guidelines have failed to change clinical practice. In the healthcare district of Castelnovo né Monti (Reggio Emilia, Italy), it became necessary for the GPs and Clinical Pathologists to work together to jointly define laboratory profiles. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 40 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 14% |
| Researcher | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 14% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 11 | 26% |
| Unknown | 5 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 52% |
| Psychology | 5 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 August 2014.
All research outputs
#15,303,896
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,547
of 7,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,007
of 164,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#84
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 164,452 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.