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 |
Extracting research-quality phenotypes from electronic health records to support precision medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Medicine, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13073-015-0166-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wei-Qi Wei, Joshua C Denny |
| Abstract |
The convergence of two rapidly developing technologies - high-throughput genotyping and electronic health records (EHRs) - gives scientists an unprecedented opportunity to utilize routine healthcare data to accelerate genomic discovery. Institutions and healthcare systems have been building EHR-linked DNA biobanks to enable such a vision. However, the precise extraction of detailed disease and drug-response phenotype information hidden in EHRs is not an easy task. EHR-based studies have successfully replicated known associations, made new discoveries for diseases and drug response traits, rapidly contributed cases and controls to large meta-analyses, and demonstrated the potential of EHRs for broad-based phenome-wide association studies. In this review, we summarize the advantages and challenges of repurposing EHR data for genetic research. We also highlight recent notable studies and novel approaches to provide an overview of advanced EHR-based phenotyping. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 | 16 | 62% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 8% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| India | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 6 | 23% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 18 | 69% |
| Scientists | 8 | 31% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 307 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 300 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 68 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 67 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 37 | 12% |
| Other | 24 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 6% |
| Other | 42 | 14% |
| Unknown | 50 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 66 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 60 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 34 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 3% |
| Other | 52 | 17% |
| Unknown | 67 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 28 March 2017.
All research outputs
#2,071,426
of 25,390,970 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#462
of 1,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,893
of 278,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#13
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,390,970 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,584 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 278,125 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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 57% of its contemporaries.