↓ Skip to main content

Summary of the proceedings of the international forum 2016: “Imaging referral guidelines and clinical decision support - how can radiologists implement imaging referral guidelines in clinical routine?…

Overview of attention for article published in Insights into Imaging, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Summary of the proceedings of the international forum 2016: “Imaging referral guidelines and clinical decision support - how can radiologists implement imaging referral guidelines in clinical routine?”
Published in
Insights into Imaging, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13244-016-0523-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

European Society of Radiology (ESR)

Abstract

The International Forum is held once a year by the ESR and its international radiological partner societies with the aim to address and discuss selected subjects of global relevance in radiology. In 2016, the issue of implementing imaging referral guidelines in clinical routine was analysed. The legal environment in the USA requires that after January 1, 2017, physicians must consult government-approved, evidence-based appropriate-use criteria through a clinical decision support system when ordering advanced diagnostic imaging exams. The ESR and the National Decision Support Company are developing "ESR iGuide", a clinical decision support system for European imaging referral guidelines using ESR imaging referral guidelines based on ACR Appropriateness Criteria. In many regions of the world, the situation is different and quite diverse, depending on the specific features of health care systems in different countries, but there are, unlike in the USA and EU, no legal obligations to implement imaging referral guidelines into the clinical practice. Imaging referral guidelines and clinical decision support implementation is a complex issue everywhere and the legal environment surrounding it even more so; how they will be implemented into the clinical practice in different areas of the world needs yet to be decided. • Implementation of imaging referral guidelines in clinical routine is needed. • Potential benefits are improved appropriateness in referrals and reduction of unnecessary radiation exposure. • The educational benefits include new insights through data collection and reporting. • The system will potentially highlight the lack in quality or availability of equipment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 16%
Researcher 8 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 12%
Other 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Other 13 23%
Unknown 9 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 11 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 January 2017.
All research outputs
#14,427,897
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Insights into Imaging
#584
of 1,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,518
of 428,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Insights into Imaging
#12
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,072 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 428,273 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 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.