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 |
Describing the content of primary care: limitations of Canadian billing data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Primary Care, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2296-13-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alan Katz, Gayle Halas, Michael Dillon, Jordan Sloshower |
| Abstract |
Primary health care systems are designed to provide comprehensive patient care. However, the ICD 9 coding system used for billing purposes in Canada neither characterizes nor captures the scope of clinical practice or complexity of physician-patient interactions. This study aims to describe the content of primary care clinical encounters and examine the limitations of using administrative data to capture the content of these visits. Although a number of U.S studies have described the content of primary care encounters, this is the first Canadian study to do so. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 12 | 55% |
| United States | 2 | 9% |
| Côte d'Ivoire | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 41% |
| Scientists | 2 | 9% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 34% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 11 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 March 2019.
All research outputs
#2,549,000
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#299
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,620
of 258,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#3
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 258,163 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.