| Title |
Financial Incentives for Home-Based Health Monitoring: A Randomized Controlled Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11606-014-2778-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aditi P. Sen, Taylor B. Sewell, E. Brooks Riley, Beth Stearman, Scarlett L. Bellamy, Michelle F. Hu, Yuanyuan Tao, Jingsan Zhu, James D. Park, George Loewenstein, David A. Asch, Kevin G. Volpp |
| Abstract |
Home wireless device monitoring could play an important role in improving the health of patients with poorly controlled chronic diseases, but daily engagement rates among these patients may be low. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 | 6 | 75% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 50% |
| Scientists | 3 | 38% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 176 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 174 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 35 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 30 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 30 | 17% |
| Unknown | 35 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 11% |
| Psychology | 12 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 34 | 19% |
| Unknown | 41 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 327. 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 22 June 2021.
All research outputs
#93,067
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#93
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#872
of 320,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 320,823 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 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 97% of its contemporaries.