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 |
Improving access to clinical practice guidelines with an interactive graphical interface using an iconic language
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-14-77 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Suzanne Pereira, Sylvain Hassler, Saliha Hamek, César Boog, Nicolas Leroy, Marie-Catherine Beuscart-Zéphir, Madeleine Favre, Alain Venot, Catherine Duclos, Jean-Baptiste Lamy |
| Abstract |
Clinical practice guidelines are useful for physicians, and guidelines are available on the Internet from various websites such as Vidal Recos. However, these guidelines are long and difficult to read, especially during consultation. Similar difficulties have been encountered with drug summaries of product characteristics. In a previous work, we have proposed an iconic language (called VCM, for Visualization of Concepts in Medicine) for representing patient conditions, treatments and laboratory tests, and we have used these icons to design a user interface that graphically indexes summaries of product characteristics. In the current study, our objective was to design and evaluate an iconic user interface for the consultation of clinical practice guidelines by physicians. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 16% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Librarian | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 29% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 September 2015.
All research outputs
#6,979,305
of 24,312,464 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#654
of 2,071 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,075
of 240,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#10
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,312,464 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,071 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 240,923 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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 70% of its contemporaries.