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 |
How organizational escalation prevention potential affects success of implementation of innovations: electronic medical records in hospitals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13012-016-0435-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mattijs S. Lambooij, Ferry Koster |
| Abstract |
Escalation of commitment is the tendency that (innovation) projects continue, even if it is clear that they will not be successful and/or become extremely costly. Escalation prevention potential (EPP), the capability of an organization to stop or steer implementation processes that do not meet their expectations, may prevent an organization of losing time and money on unsuccessful projects. EPP consists of a set of checks and balances incorporated in managerial practices that safeguard management against irrational (but very human) decisions and may limit the escalation of implementation projects. We study whether successful implementation of electronic medical records (EMRs) relates to EPP and investigate the organizational factors accounting for this relationship. Structural equation modelling (SEM), using questionnaire data of 427 doctors and 631 nurses who had experience with implementation and use of EMRs in hospitals, was applied to study whether formal governance and organizational culture mediate the relationship between EPP and the perceived added value of EMRs. Doctors and nurses in hospitals with more EPP report more successful implementation of EMR (in terms of perceived added value of the EMR). Formal governance mediates the relation between EPP and implementation success. We found no evidence that open or innovative culture explains the relationship between EPP and implementation success. There is a positive relationship between the level of EPP and perceived added value of EMRs. This relationship is explained by formal governance mechanisms of organizations. This means that management has a set of tangible tools to positively affect the success of innovation processes. However, it also means that management needs to be able to critically reflect on its (previous) actions and decisions and is willing to change plans if elements of EPP signal that the implementation process is hampered. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 3 | 27% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 18% |
| Canada | 1 | 9% |
| Colombia | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 45% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 27% |
| Scientists | 2 | 18% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 9% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 90 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 18% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 21 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 14 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 11% |
| Engineering | 7 | 8% |
| Psychology | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 25 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 12 July 2018.
All research outputs
#5,229,072
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#904
of 1,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,713
of 349,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#24
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,765,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,821 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 349,821 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.