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 |
Comparison of alphabetical versus categorical display format for medication order entry in a simulated touch screen anesthesia information management system: an experiment in clinician-computer interaction in anesthesia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-12-46 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anil A Marian, Franklin Dexter, Peter Tucker, Michael M Todd |
| Abstract |
Anesthesia information management system (AIMS) records should be designed and configured to facilitate the accurate and prompt recording of multiple drugs administered coincidentally or in rapid succession. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 2 | 40% |
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | 1% |
| Argentina | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 85 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 15% |
| Researcher | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 18 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 9 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Engineering | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 19 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 December 2014.
All research outputs
#7,413,731
of 22,665,794 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#760
of 1,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,656
of 165,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#18
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,665,794 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,978 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 165,058 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.