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 |
The effects of introducing an electronic prescription system with no copayments
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Economics Review, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13561-015-0056-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ida Iren Eriksen, Hans Olav Melberg |
| Abstract |
To examine the impact of introducing an electronic prescription system with no copayments on the number of prescriptions, the size of prescriptions, and the number of visits and phone calls to primary physicians. Fixed regression models using monthly data on per capita prescriptions claims and consultations between 2009 and 2013 at the municipality level, before and after the introduction of the electronic prescription system. The electronic prescription system with no copayment increased the number of prescriptions by between 6.0 and 8.1 %. It decreased the average size of each prescription, but it did not decrease the number of consultations. The reduced direct and indirect costs of obtaining prescriptions after the introduction of the electronic prescription system changed the financial incentives facing the patients and physicians. This led to significant changes in the level and size of prescriptions and illustrates the importance of financial incentives. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 22% |
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 17% |
| Engineering | 2 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 22% |
| Unknown | 8 | 35% |
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 16 July 2015.
All research outputs
#18,418,919
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#332
of 429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,875
of 262,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 429 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 262,414 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.