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 |
Patient facing decision support system for interpretation of laboratory test results
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12911-018-0648-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Georgy Kopanitsa, Ilia Semenov |
| Abstract |
In some healthcare systems, it is common that patients address laboratory test centers directly without a physician's recommendation. This practice is widely spread in Russia with about 28% of patients who visiting laboratory test centers for diagnostics. This causes an issue when patients get no help from the physician in understanding the results. Computer decision support systems proved to efficiently solve a resource consuming task of interpretation of the test results. So, a decision support system can be implemented to rise motivation and empower the patients who visit a laboratory service without a doctor's referral. We have developed a clinical decision support system for patients that solves a classification task and finds a set of diagnoses for the provided laboratory tests results. The Wilson and Lankton's assessment model was applied to measure patients' acceptance of the solution. A first order predicates-based decision support system has been implemented to analyze laboratory test results and deliver reports in natural language to patients. The evaluation of the system showed a high acceptance of the decision support system and of the reports that it generates. Detailed notification of the laboratory service patients with elements of the decision support is significant for the laboratory data management, and for patients' empowerment and safety. |
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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 59 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 26 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 5% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 32 | 54% |
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 17 August 2018.
All research outputs
#18,643,992
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1,589
of 2,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,133
of 328,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#22
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 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 2,013 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 328,924 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.