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 |
Comparing virtual consults to traditional consults using an electronic health record: an observational case–control study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-12-65 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ted E Palen, David Price, Susan Shetterly, Kristin B Wallace |
| Abstract |
Patients have typically received health care through face-to-face encounters. However, expansion of electronic communication and electronic health records (EHRs) provide alternative means for patient and physicians to interact. Electronic consultations may complement regular healthcare by providing "better, faster, cheaper" processes for diagnosing, treating, and monitoring health conditions. Virtual consultation between physicians may provide a method of streamlining care, potentially saving patients the time and expense of added visits. The purpose of this study was to compare physician usage and patient satisfaction with virtual consultations (VCs) with traditional consultations (TCs) facilitated within an EHR. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 67% |
| Argentina | 1 | 17% |
| India | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 122 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 14% |
| Researcher | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 23 | 18% |
| Unknown | 23 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 50 | 40% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 8 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 28 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 20 March 2019.
All research outputs
#1,406,651
of 22,669,724 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#63
of 1,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,634
of 164,716 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#4
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,669,724 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,978 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 164,716 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.