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 |
Developing public health clinical decision support systems (CDSS) for the outpatient community in New York City: our experience
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-11-753 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sam Amirfar, John Taverna, Sheila Anane, Jesse Singer |
| Abstract |
Developing a clinically relevant set of quality measures that can be effectively used by an electronic health record (EHR) is difficult. Whether it is achieving internal consensus on relevant priority quality measures, communicating to EHR vendors' whose programmers generally lack clinical contextual knowledge, or encouraging implementation of EHR that meaningfully impacts health outcomes, the path is challenging. However, greater transparency of population health, better accountability, and ultimately improved health outcomes is the goal and EHRs afford us a realistic chance of reaching it in a scalable way. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 133% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 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 | 56 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 14 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 21% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 10% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 15 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 July 2012.
All research outputs
#13,356,164
of 22,655,397 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,456
of 14,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,251
of 131,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#130
of 200 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,655,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,737 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 131,676 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 200 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.