↓ Skip to main content

Developing VISO: Vaccine Information Statement Ontology for patient education

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biomedical Semantics, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#39 of 364)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Developing VISO: Vaccine Information Statement Ontology for patient education
Published in
Journal of Biomedical Semantics, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13326-015-0016-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Muhammad Amith, Yang Gong, Rachel Cunningham, Julie Boom, Cui Tao

Abstract

To construct a comprehensive vaccine information ontology that can support personal health information applications using patient-consumer lexicon, and lead to outcomes that can improve patient education. The authors composed the Vaccine Information Statement Ontology (VISO) using the web ontology language (OWL). We started with 6 Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) documents collected from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website. Important and relevant selections from the documents were recorded, and knowledge triples were derived. Based on the collection of knowledge triples, the meta-level formalization of the vaccine information domain was developed. Relevant instances and their relationships were created to represent vaccine domain knowledge. The initial iteration of the VISO was realized, based on the 6 Vaccine Information Statements and coded into OWL2 with Protégé. The ontology consisted of 132 concepts (classes and subclasses) with 33 types of relationships between the concepts. The total number of instances from classes totaled at 460, along with 429 knowledge triples in total. Semiotic-based metric scoring was applied to evaluate quality of the ontology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Student > Master 4 13%
Professor 4 13%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 8 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 10 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Psychology 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 9 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 05 February 2020.
All research outputs
#2,602,778
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#39
of 364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,994
of 264,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#2
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 364 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. 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 264,364 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.